Why do so-called intellectual atheists refuse to accept the notion of a Creator?

Question

Don't most atheists claim to be of the scientific or intellectual type? Its mathematically impossible for the universe as we know it to exist by random occurances, so why do these so-called intellectuals keep denying intelligent design? If its mathematically impossible then HOW did it happen gosh dang it??!?!?! lol

Answer 1

You are engaging in the logical fallacy called a false dichotomy as well as a strawman. I don't know too many atheists who claim the universe exists "by random occurences" . Obviously the universe is very non-random however it is the result of mathematical laws not gods.

Do you even understand the idea of selection effects???

You are just like the puddle who thinks the world was made for him because its hole fits him so perfectly.

You can't explain the origin of complexity by postulating a prior greater complexity. I don't understand how Christians cannot understand that simple concept.

Don't you find it ridiculous that your infinitely complex god could "Just exist"? How was it created? Where did it evolve?

Christians think by stating their god is timeless that this addresses the problem of complexity. It does not. The issue is not time, but one of complexity. The more complex a system is the more unlikely the possibility of that state just existing without exterior context. If a system has one bit the odds are one half. If a system has two bits of complexity the odds are one fourth etc .

Christians claim a god with infinite complexity and no external context. The odds for this are essentially zero.

By external context, one means the system is part of a greater system which provides context for it's state. Usually in the form of a selection effect, but it could also be an evolutionary mechanism or designer. But Christians claim their God, was neither designed, evolved nor was part of a greater whole.

The only possible answer to this conundrum of how reality exists, it seems to me is that reality as a whole is not complex but simple. Since the part of reality we see seems complex, it must have external context. The likely reason then for the observable complexity is a huge selection effect: ( Our own existence ). Only in locally complex regions within the simple whole can beings such as ourselves evolve.

Now having concluded reality as a whole is simple, meaning it has few if any alternative states. What can we conclude.

1. Reality as a whole is infinite and varied. ( Finite large systems cannot be simple ).

2. Reality as a whole is necessary. It has no exterior context to provide an external reason for it to be.

The only thing I am currently aware of which is infinite, varied, necessary and profoundly simple ( no alternative states ), is Mathematics. By Mathematics I simply mean necessary tautological truth. If nature is simply Mathematics then this question is solved.

Answer 2

Why would you say that? It is NOT mathematically impossible, it is a mathematical certainty........ and a lovely one.... read on...

This universe is hundreds of trillions of billions of years old. And there have been hundreds of trillions of planets that could support some sort of life. All life, on this particular planet, is make up of the chemical elements of the Periodic Table. Harold Urey created a chemical soup of what was here a few billion years ago, and when shot with electricity, he got amino acids, the building blocks of life.....not life itself, but the building blocks..... And here's the logical part hon. The ability to combine into something living, (small to be sure, one celled or less absolutely, but a start nonetheless.....) had to have happened only ONCE, just once. And if the chances of that occurring were only a trillion to one, with all the amino acids around, and all the electricity around for soooooo long, the chances were absolutely 100% that some form of life would appear...sooner or later, but sometime... absolutely 100%...... A full grown mammal? Of course not. That would be like saying that a wind could come thru an airplane parts yard, and in one swoop assemble a 747...

If you are a bright person, able to follow a scientific argument, and have an open mind, (which by asking this question appears to be the case), read how that works in The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins, now number 8 this week on the NY Times best seller list. (Even solid supernaturalistic theists are reading this book, and making some reallllll adjustments in their beliefs.......)

Again, don't bother if you have less than a hs education, or are cemented in 'holy books' and revealed truth with no proof. but do read it if you are bright, and read well...A weak background would not allow you to understand it... reading and understanding this book would be like giving a typewriter to someone who knew no English or any other language, and ask that person to write a novel.....

Answer 3

Atheism=a + theism
a- is a prefix, which in this case, means against.
theism is related to theology. In this case, it means religion or religious teachings.

Why do we Atheists not accept the notion of a Creator? Well, 'a Creator' refers to a deity. Religion is the belief in one or many deities. How can an Atheist (against religion) accept the notion of a Creator (that which religion is based on)? We cannot, by the very definitions of Atheism and religion.

How did it all happen? Well, scientists are still working on parts of the theory. To say that the universe could not be randomly created according to math shows a gross misunderstanding of basic science. The Big Bang theory is the most plausible explanation for how the universe came to be the way it is. You might ask, 'well, where did all the matter and energy that had to go into the Big Bang come from?' That's similar to me asking you 'well, where did your god come from?' Science is still developing new answers and new questions everyday. Just because scientists do not have the full story yet does not make them wrong. In fact, you're bible does not have all the answers, either. Your excuse is that god didn't HAVE to tell you everything...that it was too much for the human mind to handle. A convenient excuse, which means nothing more than 'I don't know, but I'm too lazy/stupid to bother trying to figure it out.'

Intelligent design is just a rewrite of the beginning of the book of genesis in the bible. The bible was written by men, long ago, before much of what we know by science had been discovered. Is it not possible for those men to be wrong?

Let me ask this: If, as you believe, your god created man and woman in his own image, do you believe that god created human brains? If you do, do you believe that he might have done so, so that you could not JUST function in day to day life, but so that you could learn about the world around you, as well? If your god meant for you to learn about the world around you, couldn't he have meant for you to understand science? Would that not make it possible to say that science may actually be correct on the matter? Why discount the possiblility that the scientific explanations (the Big Bang, evolution, etc.) may, in fact, be right? Maybe your god is trying to let you understand the accuracy of such views in time. This is all assuming that your god even exists.

Go out into the world and learn about math, the Big Bang, evolution, and other scientific explanations BEFORE trying to say what is and what is not mathmatically impossible.

Answer 4

RIght. You've committed at least 3 logical fallacies in that lame attempt to be a smarty pants.

You show me the math that says its "impossible" for the universe to occur by "random chance". You are making an unproven, and I think false, assumption to set up your strawman argument. Those are fallacies 1 and 2.

You are also guilty of the fallacy of a false dichotomy. If the notion of the Big Bang turns out to be wrong, (and science accepts that is possible), then the default alternative is not godidit. We could be part of some alien experiment, or there could be numerous gods in numerous universes. Who knows? Well I don't, and you don't either, so keep an open mind.

In fact the mathematics of Cosmology, black holes and quantum gravity suggests that "something" is more likely than "nothing", but it doesn't imply creation or a creator. You have got it wrong. Then with the typical boldness of ignorance, you posited that "so called intellectuals" (called by you, not by us, I should point out) deny intelligent design. That's close to an ad hominem attack for your 4th logical fallacy, but I'll let that one go.

Intelligent Design is Creationism with a bit of lipstick and a padded bra. It is not science, though they use a lot of scientific terminology which does seem to impress people who know nothing about actual science (i.e. most Christians)

I like to refer to the arguments of ID as "scientistic".
They remind me of those cheesy 50's sci-fi movies where in the background they have mysterious blinking machines, and beakers with different colored fluids bubbling away. It is window dressing but is otherwise pointless diversion.

Answer 5

Pick a number, not necessarily an integer, between 0 and 10. There are an infinite number of possible numbers you could have picked, so the probability of picking any given number is 0. Therefore it's mathematically impossible for you to have picked whatever number you picked. So does that prove you didn't pick the number you picked?

Evolution isn't random. Mutations are random, but the selective pressures that determine which mutations are passed on are not. Statistically speaking, if enough random mutations occur, then one of them will confer a survival advantage, and will then proliferate through the population due to selective pressures.

Back to the pick a number analogy, assume that picking a number between 8 and 8.1 conferred a survival advantage. The chances that your particular number is between 8 and 8.1 is 1 in 100. If everyone in the world picked a number between 0 and 10 every 5 minutes, indefinitely, what are the chances that no one would ever pick a number between 8 and 8.1? It's mathematically impossible for it NOT to happen. And there you have a random mutation that can be passed on and selected for. Trillions of organisms continually reproducing and mutating for billions of years, and you think that it's mathematically impossible for any given mutation to occur?

But what, exactly, is the probability that an intelligent creator to whom the known laws of physics do not apply spontaneously came into existence, and that the descriptions of Him created by humans with absolutely no evidence happen to match His true nature? Now THAT is mathematically impossible.

Answer 6

MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE? What issue of The Watchtower did you read that in?

You misunderstand science. First off, it's not possible to prove that it's mathematically impossible. Second, it's only true that the math for that instant in time doesn't exist, because the whole idea of mathematics doesn't work when analyzing a universe without rules or reference points. You can't quantify a time/space that had no time or space or matter. That doesn't make it mathematically impossible, it just means that the circumstances are beyond the reach of our current tools.

The fact that it hasn't yet been explained isn't a valid justification for resorting to irrational mysticism to clumsily shoehorn in an explanation. I'm not going to start believing in something that I consider to be comically stupid just to fill a gap.

I don't worry much about it. The whole question isn't really important in my day to day existence. There's no guarantee that science will ever answer the question. It's a big question and a lot of new techniques need to be pioneered before it can be tackled in anything other then a theoretical way.

You believe in your god. That's fine. Why isn't that enough for you? Why do you think that your cheap little plastic god of an alien space monster convinces us of anything, or is in any way interesting to us as anything other then bad science fiction from an ancient time?

Answer 7

Where were you ever told that it is mathematically impossible for the universe to exist from random occurance? It isn't impossible at all. Now the odds that intelligent design (a great mis-named concept) is responsible for all things without any proof, any evidence, not even a good theory other than the bible says? Intelligent design is a fraud beyond belief and not even a plausible or believable alternative.

Answer 8

If you truly understood science, you would know no scientist truly uses the word "impossible". Go learn about what you are talking about before you make a bigger fool of yourself.

If it's impossible to create the universe, it's also mathematically impossible that god was created gosh dang it!

Answer 9

Yeah. That's us Atheists. I'm always going around calling myself scientific and intellectual. (I get free punches on my latte card when I do that ya know)

Evolution is the opposite of "randomness". Really! If you'll take 5 minutes to read something, I'll find a link that explains that.

Answer 10

Try and understand this.

Atheists do not believe that the universe exists by random occurences.

It's Theists who believe that atheists believe the universe exists by random occurences.

Theists are wrong about what they believe atheists believe.

Repeat this to yourself 100 times or until it sinks in (whichever comes first)

Atheists do not believe that the universe exists through random chance.

Atheists do not believe that the universe exists through random chance.

Atheists do not believe that the universe exists through random chance.

Atheists do not believe that the universe exists through random chance.