From: "Robert Comer" 

> I never saw him throw the snowball, but I can reconstruct the action that
> caused it to hit me based on indirect observation of the results.

But you could be wrong too, what if the guy was standing behind the guy you
though threw the snowball...

--
Bob Comer


"Steve Ewing"  wrote in message
news:op.sz9frtvjsagvys{at}news.barkto.com...
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 15:36:08 -0500, Gary Britt 
> wrote:
>
>> Then what it suggests is an implication; an assumption of some sort based
>> upon what can be observed.  To believe that what evolution suggests is
>> correct does take some amount of *belief* or *faith* if you will,
>> because it cannot be directly observed
>
> What it requires is a belief in causation; that time flows in one
> direction, and that from a given reaction, the causing action can be
> inferred.
>
> I see a snowball flying at me.  I see the neighbor's kid, following
> through.  I create a hyposthesis that he threw the snowball at me.  I
> reconstruct the snowball's trajectory backwards and see that it originates
> at the kid.  I then demonstrate how to "lead the runner"
with a snowball
> of my own.
>
> I never saw him throw the snowball, but I can reconstruct the action that
> caused it to hit me based on indirect observation of the results.
>
> --
> Steve 
> http://www.qmss.com/~sewing

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5