From: wolverine01@charter.net   
      
   On 2/2/2026 6:11 AM, Martin Harran wrote:   
   > On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 16:15:19 -0600, sticks    
   > wrote:   
   >   
   > [...]   
   >   
   >> I believe Martin didn't like the fine-tuning section, which I thought   
   >> was excellently done, and the OoL section lays out what we know with the   
   >> impossible chances of it happening in a very easily readable manner.   
   >> Again, they use the words of mostly secular scientists to further make   
   >> their point.  It is very effective.   
   >   
   > Please explain to me why you think all that fine tuning had to be   
   > predetermined so that a particular kind of life could develop rather   
   > than that a form developing to match the conditions that existed?   
      
   You have been complaining lately that people are either misquoting you   
   or accusing them of simply misstating what you believe.  I am puzzled   
   then that you have no problem doing exactly that to me.  Please don't.   
      
      
   --   
   Science Doesn’t Support Darwin. Scientists Do   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)