Posted by T Wake on 10/11/05 17:07

"George Hammond" <ghammond1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:vsmmk11ngchv0voric7257hqdu2808ka8o@4ax.com...
>
> [Hammond]
> Sorry Crapshot, an "ontological" proof is NOT a "scientific" proof.
> This is a scientific discussion, not a philawsephy discussion.
>

You wouldnt recognise science if it smashed you in the face.


> On the other hand, Hammond's scientific proo of God IS SUFFICIENT
> proof of the EXISTENCE OF GOD.... to two decimal places.
>

Only two decimal places. Very poor showing. Interesting terminology, it has
been a while since I saw some one claim a scientific proof to x decimal
places. Infact, you are the main person who has done it.

Often I have seen the term "two significant figures" used but not two
decimal places. Are you still in school George?

> It has been proven experimentally, and published in the peer revfiewed
> scientific literature.

Vanity press.

> See my website for a full explanation.

Ha.

> And quit crossposting to alt.usenet.kooks

Is that only something you are allowed to do? Crackpot.

[Back to original message]