Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Big Bang Theory Supports a Belief in the Universe Designer or Creator God
Wollysaurus
Member (Idle past 4492 days)
Posts: 52
From: US
Joined: 08-25-2011


Message 140 of 317 (640238)
11-08-2011 12:08 AM
Reply to: Message 139 by designtheorist
11-07-2011 11:56 PM


Re: Reply to Catholic Scientist
Out of curiosity, how do you not run into the problem of infinite regression? Who designed the designer? If the universe must have a designer because it is complex or exhibits "tuning", wouldn't the same hold true for a "being" complex enough to create a universe? If not, why does this creator being get a free pass as "uncreated" while the universe does not?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by designtheorist, posted 11-07-2011 11:56 PM designtheorist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by designtheorist, posted 11-08-2011 12:21 AM Wollysaurus has replied

  
Wollysaurus
Member (Idle past 4492 days)
Posts: 52
From: US
Joined: 08-25-2011


Message 147 of 317 (640248)
11-08-2011 12:30 AM
Reply to: Message 144 by designtheorist
11-08-2011 12:21 AM


Re: Reply to Wollysaurus
Hmm... I think that's an argument formed from a misonception of what BB theory actually postulates. Others on here already mentioned the meaninglessness of the phrase "before the BB" with the analogy of asking what is north of the north pole.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by designtheorist, posted 11-08-2011 12:21 AM designtheorist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by designtheorist, posted 11-08-2011 12:36 AM Wollysaurus has not replied

  
Wollysaurus
Member (Idle past 4492 days)
Posts: 52
From: US
Joined: 08-25-2011


(1)
Message 207 of 317 (640342)
11-08-2011 8:15 PM


Maybe the problem here is that one can appear to be using gaps in current knowledge as "evidence" to support the existence of a designer. In fact, all a "gap" is is lack of evidence or knowledge one way or another.
Perhaps one could say that given what we know about cosmology, astronomy, geology, etc, there are certain models of deliberate creation that are falsified (as in Young Earth models, or that North America rides on the back of a giant turtle). But as a previous poster mentioned, this is probably just an extention of "God" being pushed further and further back as our knowledge of the world around us grows. We don't look for God in storm clouds now. Nor do we in the formation of solar systems or globular clusters. So he has to be hiding somewhere - so far back that we now have to use painfully meaningless phrases like "before time began".
That said, what I don't think you could *ever* prove is design with humans as an end goal. When I read Lee Strobel's _The Case for a Creator_ I was dismayed to read some very weak arguments towards the end of the book. I can't remember who he was interviewing (I don't have the book in front of me) however the arguments were dismal. That we are in a position to view eclipses was one particularly strange argument. The entire universe was created, with our own particular (and rather insignificant) solar system set up as it is, just so we humans could view solar and lunar eclipses. Not to mention badly outdated information on extra-solar planets.
Another issue (I'm not necessarily charging the OP with this) are vast logical leaps made. Even supposing that one could deduce that the universe was designed, there is a vast gulf between that conclusion and that the designer is also YHWH who sent his son (who is part of himself) to be sacrificed to atone for sins which YHWH defined.
What about the possibility that the universe is not a deliberate creation by this "being" (if we allow for this entity's existence for the sake of argument) but rather a cosmic accident? After all, if the thing is omnipotent, the universe could very well be an unnoticed side effect of something else it was up to. You know, like the flotsam from some sneeze. Nod to Douglas Adams.

Replies to this message:
 Message 225 by designtheorist, posted 11-09-2011 12:57 AM Wollysaurus has not replied

  
Wollysaurus
Member (Idle past 4492 days)
Posts: 52
From: US
Joined: 08-25-2011


(2)
Message 252 of 317 (640459)
11-09-2011 8:48 PM
Reply to: Message 250 by Taq
11-09-2011 6:14 PM


Re: Reply to Wollysaurus
Re: Reply to Wollysaurus
It is a tad coincidental the Sun is 400 times larger than the moon and 400 times further away, making full solar eclipses possible. That does not happen anywhere else in our solar system. What was most impressive to me were the three discoveries made because of eclipses. If true, it does seem like evidence the Designer arranged for this relationship of Sun and moon so mankind could discover more secrets of the universe.
Taq writes:
It is statements like this that make design theory all but worthless. Is it a tad coincidental? Absolutely, BECAUSE IT IS A CONCIDENCE. Given the millions to one odds of anyone winning the lottery I would guess that you also think God picks the winners. There is never anything connecting the facts with a designer other than the needs of the person based on their already held religious beliefs.
To assume that the way the solar system works is designed for the pleasure of human scientific instruments is just a bizarre level of hubris.
You could apply the same sort of "logic" to all sorts of things. God wanted the British Empire to rule the seas so that one day Darwin would visit some islands and begin to piece together biological evolution. God made that mountain so that whoever lives there would have a better view of the sea. God made the skies clear as they are so that telescopes could begin to piece together the workings of the solar system in the first place. It's just bizarre. Well, not really bizarre, it is grasping at straws.
Even supposing that the earth and solar system here were built for some purpose, this still would not require the "designer" to be the builder of the universe -- just the solar system. Why is God required to be a universal architect? Why is the possibility of an entity operating as part of and within the rules of the universe immediately excluded? I'm guessing that's because such an entity should be detectable and quantifiable, and it is much easier to keep God around if he possesses all the qualities of something which does not exist.
Mind you, I'm not saying there *is* evidence, just that the creationist presupposes that their deity is responsible for life, the universe, and everything, when often their "evidence" is quite local in nature. They suppose that if they can "prove" that life on earth did not evolve, or that the earth is not as old as it is (among YECs anyway), any other scientific field of study, theory or law that disagrees with their worldview somehow goes *poof*. The more I read these sorts of exchanges, the more creationist arguments appear to be little more than giant leaps in bad logic rooted in presuppositions which cannot be tested, much less falsified.
Edited by Wollysaurus, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 250 by Taq, posted 11-09-2011 6:14 PM Taq has not replied

  
Wollysaurus
Member (Idle past 4492 days)
Posts: 52
From: US
Joined: 08-25-2011


(1)
Message 303 of 317 (640568)
11-10-2011 4:07 PM


I think my takeaway from this thread is simple.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. However, it is not positive evidence of something, either. A gap in knowledge is just that: a lack of knowledge.
A person may fill that gap with whatever their preconceptions and biases will allow (be it God or whatever), but this does not constitute evidence in any meaningful sense. And sometimes, gaps widen and change shape due to poor understanding of the subject matter in the first place, whether due to ignorance or being misled by others.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024