Jar mentioned the non member readers. At this moment there are 193 visitors here. It would be a sad waste of those readers time if they were reading one of the posts I have been involved in where I am trying to explain what the word 'nature' means to IMJ or the word 'communicate' to DB.
I would be interested for hear what the lurkers think about this matter. My own opinion is that Buzz won't really modify his approach so why bother: however, as you say a thread with him in it could be valuable to the lurkers.
Lurkers: what say you?
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
™ Version 4.2
