Posts by Hoffnung

122

Refuting the ARGUMENT BY DESIGN.

by nicolaou in

it's tiresome and it doesn't add up but it's one of the most popular arguments for god's existence, "the argument by design.

" jehovah's witnesses and other believers point out a wonder of nature like the eye and compare it to a 'lesser' mechanical wonder of human design like a camera.

the supposed conclusion is that this natural wonder is evidence of creation by a powerful designer; god.. .

Hoffnung

"the anthropic principle is still valid when assessing whether the conditions under which life can exist can be duplicated elsewhere in the universe."

Well, the amount of variables drastically influences the amount of chance. We do not have all the variables available to calculate the chance. Chances are that it's a lot more complicated than we thought it was. Otherwise it would have already been done, most probably. We can't know whether it is one chance in a billion or one chance in a thousand, until we have created life (duplicated its origin if you like). And that is a fact. I have nothing against the principle though. Many modern appliances would not be available without it. But only with reliable data.

"neither of us a-priori know what happens if you take a planet like the early earth and leave it alone for a few billion years".

True, however, scientists are searching for the early stages of our planet. And I think they've come quite far in that field already.

"This too is ever so slightly slanted language in comparing life with dead material."

I think you understand what I mean though. Sorry for my use of simple language. maybe "non-living" would be more accurate. standard elements and molecules like they are available in other parts of the universe. iron, oxygen, water, etc...

"The wheel illustration is limited also . . . because we are armed with the knowledge that such an object is in fact designed."

Otherwise I would not have used it, right? The point I make with it is still valid. It is all about accepting or eliminating possiblities and finding keys to the real answer. In that respect, the illustration does a good job.

So what is the similar list of "demands" we make from theistic scientists?

Bohm, I think that is one of the best questions one can ask in this debate. I hope you can come up with a list of such conditions. I will think about these as well, but I might not be fully objective, and hence overlook some conditions.

Terry, did you notice I have not quoted a single bible verse? looking for traces of a designer in the origin of life and believing in the God of the bible are miles away from each other. That has no place in this debate, IMO.

122

Refuting the ARGUMENT BY DESIGN.

by nicolaou in

it's tiresome and it doesn't add up but it's one of the most popular arguments for god's existence, "the argument by design.

" jehovah's witnesses and other believers point out a wonder of nature like the eye and compare it to a 'lesser' mechanical wonder of human design like a camera.

the supposed conclusion is that this natural wonder is evidence of creation by a powerful designer; god.. .

Hoffnung

I agree that advancing the designer theory does not really resolve the problem of HOW life originated, because it merely rephrases the question to: HOW did the designer DO it? + an extra problem is created: Where did the designer come from? A question we will never find answered unless the designer reveals himself in an undisputable way.

That is however no reason to reject the theory. It is not because of doubling the problem, that it becomes unacceptable or impossible.

To illustrate: we will never know how the 1st wheel came about. But nobody doubts that somebody invented it. It was designed, and we don't know where the designer came from. It is not because the answer: "somebody designed it", is actually a doubling of the problem, and not really a solution, does not mean it is not true. It is a key to the solution. To find the answer, we will have to start searching for the oldest wheel. As the earth is quite old, there are many traces of all the life forms and sequences of them, with other words, it could be possible to find some of the designer tricks used, bringing us closer to the HOW-answer. That is one side.

On the other side, to prove the anthropic principle, there are 2 necessary conditions.

1st. Scientists will have to prove that they can build life from dead material on purpose, influencing directly the process. We are closer to this than ever before, I must admit.

2nd. After this, they will have to prove that the necessary conditions, to bring all the building blocks of this life form together with the triggering mechanism of it, could have happened spontaneously.

If both conditions are fullfilled, we will finally have reliable data to start calculationg how much CHANCE there is that this happened, and only THEN, the anthropic principle can be used. As far as I know, there is not enough data available, as both conditions are not yet fullfilled. But maybe I did not do my homework well enough, and scientists might have made progress in this fields.

Ruling out the designer theory, is throwing away one of the keys to the answer of one of the most important questions one can ask. I am not convinced I should throw away that key, as there is much in nature that speaks against it.

122

Refuting the ARGUMENT BY DESIGN.

by nicolaou in

it's tiresome and it doesn't add up but it's one of the most popular arguments for god's existence, "the argument by design.

" jehovah's witnesses and other believers point out a wonder of nature like the eye and compare it to a 'lesser' mechanical wonder of human design like a camera.

the supposed conclusion is that this natural wonder is evidence of creation by a powerful designer; god.. .

Hoffnung

The reason I am in favor for the designer theory, is that I am a technician and have come across many complex systems. When I compare these with the systems in nature, every logic thinking vibe in me is obliged to see a great designer behind it all. Mere coincidence does not create or design anything, definitely no complex life systems.

122

Refuting the ARGUMENT BY DESIGN.

by nicolaou in

it's tiresome and it doesn't add up but it's one of the most popular arguments for god's existence, "the argument by design.

" jehovah's witnesses and other believers point out a wonder of nature like the eye and compare it to a 'lesser' mechanical wonder of human design like a camera.

the supposed conclusion is that this natural wonder is evidence of creation by a powerful designer; god.. .

Hoffnung

What happened when this "one chance in a billion" took place?

What were the chemical, fysical, electrical, thermodynamic processes behind it? Why is nothing spontaneously like that ever duplicated in a lab?

energy transportation is not the same as life. The spontaneous formation of a complicated molecule like DNA, however small the chance of this happening, does not bring anything to life.

one chance in a billion explains nothing. It's a theory like the designer theory with it's own merits and problems. up for everybody to believe or to reject, usually depending on your agenda and religious or atheist past and present beliefs.

I lost my religion. I have no agenda. I just want to know.

Before I forget, I would like to thank Nickolas for taking the time to give us the excerpt out of Dawkins book.

122

Refuting the ARGUMENT BY DESIGN.

by nicolaou in

it's tiresome and it doesn't add up but it's one of the most popular arguments for god's existence, "the argument by design.

" jehovah's witnesses and other believers point out a wonder of nature like the eye and compare it to a 'lesser' mechanical wonder of human design like a camera.

the supposed conclusion is that this natural wonder is evidence of creation by a powerful designer; god.. .

Hoffnung

How many of these are in a goldilocks zone?

How many are orbiting around stable stars like the sun?

How many of these have vaccuum cleaner planets like Jupiter around?

How many have an oxygen-rich atmosphere?

How many contain water in abundance?

The answers to these questions reduce chances in considerable measure.

122

Refuting the ARGUMENT BY DESIGN.

by nicolaou in

it's tiresome and it doesn't add up but it's one of the most popular arguments for god's existence, "the argument by design.

" jehovah's witnesses and other believers point out a wonder of nature like the eye and compare it to a 'lesser' mechanical wonder of human design like a camera.

the supposed conclusion is that this natural wonder is evidence of creation by a powerful designer; god.. .

Hoffnung

Hi Nicalou,

Thank you for bringing this up. I am not a creationist and I do not like it to be compared with one. The processes in nature are what they are since many millions of years. No creator - designer - god has done anything to them since ages ago. There is no need for it for the designer to act, as the processes are almost perfect.

I even can agree with some points of the natural selection idea.

However the anthropic principle is absolute bollocks. It is as much a circular reasoning as the Witnesses use them so often. It is not because there is one chance in a billion and there are this billion planets available in the universe, that things happened this way.

I am not going to hang my understanding of the universe on something that has such a low probability of happening. You will not hang your life on an operation that has one chance in a million to succeed, are you?

122

Refuting the ARGUMENT BY DESIGN.

by nicolaou in

it's tiresome and it doesn't add up but it's one of the most popular arguments for god's existence, "the argument by design.

" jehovah's witnesses and other believers point out a wonder of nature like the eye and compare it to a 'lesser' mechanical wonder of human design like a camera.

the supposed conclusion is that this natural wonder is evidence of creation by a powerful designer; god.. .

Hoffnung

"Who says it is a "very lucky" coincidence? Perhaps things would have followed a different evolutionary path if ice sank. You assume ice is like it is because that's how life needs it to be rather than that life is like it is because that's how it works with ice."

Jackie

Just try the scenario where ice is heavier then water and all your calculations will tell you life would go extinct on most parts of this planet.

122

Refuting the ARGUMENT BY DESIGN.

by nicolaou in

it's tiresome and it doesn't add up but it's one of the most popular arguments for god's existence, "the argument by design.

" jehovah's witnesses and other believers point out a wonder of nature like the eye and compare it to a 'lesser' mechanical wonder of human design like a camera.

the supposed conclusion is that this natural wonder is evidence of creation by a powerful designer; god.. .

Hoffnung

"The evidence screams "a naturally occurring event in response to environmental factors". The process is neither malevolent nor benevolent, bereft of intelligent intent or a pre-determined result. Intelligent design is thus reduced to remote foreknowledge at best . . . a foreknowledge that intended a struggle and fight for survival."

I agree with this, Sizemik. There is no external influence in the natural processes at the very moment. The designer, if still alive at all, is just observing at best, and very uninterested and far away at worst. Which is absolutely normal, because the balancing systems in nature are doing their job. Only human presence is messing things up.

I find the world and the life on it too beautiful and complex to believe it is merely a product of happy concidences in a goldilocks zone of the universe. It feels like the earth has won the lottery every day. I might have little convincing evidence for it, but this could not have come into existence without a designer. Everything I discover about nature confirms me in that belief. And yes that is a belief and not a fact based upon evidence. And so far I do not see a reason to change that.

122

Refuting the ARGUMENT BY DESIGN.

by nicolaou in

it's tiresome and it doesn't add up but it's one of the most popular arguments for god's existence, "the argument by design.

" jehovah's witnesses and other believers point out a wonder of nature like the eye and compare it to a 'lesser' mechanical wonder of human design like a camera.

the supposed conclusion is that this natural wonder is evidence of creation by a powerful designer; god.. .

Hoffnung

Another point I find very hard to explain without a designer, is how many complicated ecosystems have come to exist on this planet.

Wikipedia under the heading ecosystem states: Introduction of new elements into an ecosystem tend to have a disruptive effect. In some cases, this can lead to ecological collapse or "trophic cascading" and the death of many species within the ecosystem.

With other words, take away 1 element out of the ecosystem, and the rest might disappear with it.

This automatically brings up the question, how did all the parts of the ecosystem find each other in the 1st place? The explanation in wikipedia is far from giving any answer to this question, it is lacking examples to prove the points favoring evolution, and I have so far never gotten any serious answer to that at all.

More complexity in life and its ecosystems is usually detrimental for the survival and progress of a species, so the chances of just evolving without design are rather small.

122

Refuting the ARGUMENT BY DESIGN.

by nicolaou in

it's tiresome and it doesn't add up but it's one of the most popular arguments for god's existence, "the argument by design.

" jehovah's witnesses and other believers point out a wonder of nature like the eye and compare it to a 'lesser' mechanical wonder of human design like a camera.

the supposed conclusion is that this natural wonder is evidence of creation by a powerful designer; god.. .

Hoffnung

The absolute failure in the design is the human psyche. So many 1000s years of human life have been accompanied with much unnecessary suffering and it continues to exist. The designer - creator did a shabby job at best on this one. Maybe evolutionists have a good point there. The ethical boundaries a designer would have set to the mind, are missing.