> Is divine creation a mystery or an impossibility? Much too hard. But, backing off a little, are there any inroads to be made into the above by answering the simpler question: Are mysteries and impossibilities distinguishable? Hmm. Still looks too hard (for me). But, would it help to pull back a bit further and instead of going straight to mystery vs impossibility, start with non-sense vs falsehood? For example: assuming, the normal, everyday meanings of the various words involved, does each of the following sentences correspond with falsehood, or nonsense? (I’m hoping each must be either one or the other!) 1. The present King of France is bald. 2. C++ is more water-resistant than Shostakovich V. 3. There are four and a half Persons in the Trinity. 4. A square circle has an area of zero, and a perimeter of length infinity. 5. Pugh, Pugh, Barney McGrue, [rasp], [fart], [sneeze].

@Frances, so my cunning plan worked then? ;-) I'm surprised I fooled you as long as I did.

Pat, Tim, thanks. As we now know, the "No" vote won. I know many back home who will be sad about that result, and will feel they tried but only just failed to take power from England and give it to the people of Scotland. From my far off vantage point though, it looks a bit different: they tried but only just failed to take power from one bunch of rulers in Westminster and give it to another bunch of rulers in Edinburgh. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

@Brad, yeah, I think I'd have to give the prize to Parker too. He was an Englishman if I recall right? (I'm not holding that against him!)

Thanks John. Yeah, I feel bad about the whole EDA blog thing; this one hardly qualifies anymore. I keep swithering between having a single blog for everything, or at least three: this one, my general business one (http://www.notesfromasmallcompany.com/) and then one where I can rant lyrical about SystemVerilog and stuff. If I could just decide then I'd have more time to actually post stuff! :-)

Interesting to read the comments following that article. Many if not most are all variations on "yay" and "boo". One of the things I find compelling about Singer, by contrast, is his calm and calculated style. He puts one logical foot in front of the other, and sees where it leads him.

Could be that I suppose. Then again, Singer himself is an atheist, and of non-practicing Jewish background. What, if anything, can we infer from that? Also, he goes into quite a bit of depth on Catholic orthodoxy concerning animal welfare. There's not much support for it from Aquinas, for example. Even St. Francis, while an animal lover was also, as Singer notes, a lover of the sun and moon and pretty much everything else. Again, where does that leave us?

Great things come in small packages ;)

Really? So what's in the spaces they left? Maybe I'll take a look when I'm next over.

Thanks Jeff. I'll take a look.

@Gordon, Before I answer that I think I'd like him to show said year book first. I'm not sure I believe it exists. Maybe Trump can organize a campaign to have him produce it.

Hi Davie :)