When it comes to solar evolution, you believe that the universe started in a big bang. From this kaotic mess, you believe that the universe became more organized and complex on it's own, even though this violates all known scientific laws.
The only option that makes sense is that God created the universe. But why are the Atheists not willing to even entertain this option?
2007-07-11 12:20:10 · 26 answers · asked by theo48 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Paul S..............I haven't considered myself a kid in over 45 years. But even way back then, I was taught that scientific rules are rules........and cosmic and biological evolution breaks most of them
2007-07-11 12:46:42 · update #1
Please quote the "known scientific laws" that you claim this violates!
Real science relies on evidence, lots of it!
You dismiss this evidence that has been accumulated, peer reviewed, verified with technological compatibility in our daily lives. And then you offer nothing in regard to proving an even more complex Entity for which there is zero proof created it. Nothing except your say so!
Scientific tradition is in complete opposition to accepting things on anyone's say so! Science relies on evidence. Atheists live in a world built on understanding this evidence.
Why are Theists not willing to even entertain real evidence?
2007-07-11 12:34:26 · answer #1 · answered by Chessmistress1000 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I am neither Christian nor atheist. Am I allowed to respond? Thank you.
First, there is more scientifically valid evidence for the Big Bang than for any other theory of creation -- rather, the beginning of all being.
Look at it this way: Suppose the universe were a sandbox containing enough space to hold 100 rocks in a single layer, with no rock overlapping another. Let's say 20 rocks are put in the sandbox. Whether they are tossed in or appear spontaneously does not matter.
What matters is this. If you come along later and see those 20 rocks in a "shotgun pattern", you will say that they were randomly placed. If you see those rocks arranged in a pattern resembling a letter of the English alphabet, you will say that an intelligent being placed them that way.
The hard truth is that the chances of 20 rocks resembling a letter is exactly the same as any one of the other ** random patterns possible.
** I should leave it to someone else who better remembers his probability theory to fill in the number. But I think it's something like this:
The location of any one rock is mutually exclusive relative to the location of any other rock. The first rock has a 1/100 chance to be at any location, then that location "disappears" from the calculations. Thus the second rock has a 1/99 chance of any remaining location, and so on.
Thus, after all rocks are located, the chances of each pattern are 1/100 + 1/99 + 1/98 . . . +1/81. Nearly infinitesimal.
How many patterns are possible? A permutation of 100 locations taken 20 at a time: (n!/((n-r)!*r!)), or 100!/(80!)(20!). A lot!
In the final analysis, the chances of a universe randomly evolving the way ours did is exactly the same as one intelligently designed.
2007-07-11 14:00:11 · answer #2 · answered by Grey Raven 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think that the evidence is currently best explained by a model in which all the matter of the universe sprung forth from a singular point. That obviously is very hard to imagine and complicated and needs lots of further 'splainin' but I don't know of a better model.
As far as your comment about the universe becoming "more organized and complex on it's (sic) own" and the violation of all known scientific laws - you are probably referring to the canard of invoking the 2nd law of thermodynamics as some kind of disproof.
First of all, I would object to your claim that the universe became "more organized and complex". In an thermodynamic sense, to become organized is to become less complex. So, entropy favors the dispersed mass of the universe coalescing into solid bodies through the action of gravity.
Second, you say "on it's own" as if there was no force capable of doing that. The pulling together of local pieces of matter by gravity is the most scientifically understandable part of the big bang theory.
Third, your argument is based on ignorance - that is, because you cannot explain something, you invoke a magical explaination for it. Of course you cannot explain how your magic works, so that is no better. And in this case, your ignorance is self-induced as the things you mention as being without explaination actually have very good, well accepted explainations.
Thank you for asking!
2007-07-11 13:04:15 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because the "option" is simply made up. I call it the God Security Blanket. See a question that you don't know the answer to? Throw the God Security Blanket over it! Can't figure out why some things happen? Throw the God Security Blanket over it! What a fine substitute for thinking.
There's nothing wrong with admitting that there are things you don't know. It actually opens the door for furthering knowledge.
By the way... if the Big Bang theory is the most respected one in science... how exactly can it violate all known scientific laws?
2007-07-11 12:30:13 · answer #4 · answered by writersblock73 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
"even though this violates all known scientific laws." - Are you sure you don't mean even though it is the basis of all known scientific laws.
"The only option that makes sense is that God created the universe." - Are you claiming your religion is not based on Faith, but it is based on facts, we don't take kindly to science being trampled on.
And about making sense, somehow an Invisible being that is capable of anything, doesn't help anybody until they die, and runs the world exactly how he wants it too, not including the fact that he is a Man and God at the same time according to some, somehow doesn't make sense at all.
If someone had to prove the existence of God in Court to a completely neutral Judge and Jury (all agnostic maybe ?), there would be absolutely no evidence, or no statement the defence could make that isn't a logical fallacy.
2007-07-11 12:31:15 · answer #5 · answered by Ian G 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
"From this kaotic mess, you believe that the universe became more organized and complex on it's own, even though this violates all known scientific laws"
No, in fact it doesn't violate ANY known scientific laws.
How telling that you would claim that it violates "all known scientific laws". Did you think that it violates the laws governing the formation of tornadoes? Those that explain how oxygen is absorbed in the lungs?
More to the point, did you think about the meaning of that phrase when you typed it, or did you just mindlessly type it on the assumption that it was impressively scientific-sounding?
You're in way over your head, kid. Trying talking about something you understand instead.
2007-07-11 12:24:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 0⤋
Nothing about evolution or the creation of galaxies or any other part of the universe violates scientific laws. Please stop using the argument, you probably don't even understand the basics of most of them.
Even if that were the case, claiming that God did all of it still does not make any sense to me. Even if I were to believe in some Creator, I wouldn't believe in a virgin birth and miracles or any of that. And you're wrong about atheists not entertaining the option. I followed it for 19 years.
2007-07-11 12:30:02 · answer #7 · answered by chlaxman17 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
"you believe that the universe became more organized and complex on it's own"
No. Wherever did you get that idea?
Entropy in a closed system is something else.
Local changes in organisation may be due to energy input (in our case, at this time, from the sun) and involve no overall increase in energy. Perfectly permissible with no broken laws.
"All known scientific laws"? It might be time to learn some more, and unlearn some of the things you think you know.
I did entertain the option when I was a Christian.
Study of the bible, and physics, (amongst other things) gradually convinced me I was wrong.
2007-07-11 12:30:43 · answer #8 · answered by Pedestal 42 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Really? That's a new one on me. Which scientific laws are violated by the Big Bang theory? I'd be interested in reading about this! More importantly, which scientific laws promote the idea that God created the universe? I'd be interested in reading that, too.
2007-07-11 12:31:13 · answer #9 · answered by Avie 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Atheists don't all believe the same thing you know
I have no idea how the universe started but I understand that the current accepted theory is the big bang.
I'm sorry but I just don't get the believers need to use god as an explanation for everything we don't have the exact answer to.
Why be afraid of not knowing
2007-07-11 23:14:51 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋