Monday, 22 April 2013

Godandscience IV

For part 1 see here.
http://iamchristianiamanatheist.blogspot.kr/2013/04/godandscience-iii.html

I apologize in advance for the length of this article, but there was just way to many lies to let go.




Ok, so when I clicked the link it said “Part 2: Is God Real: The Evidence for God's Existence”, but then in the introduction the author says he will “provide us with indirect evidence that a super-intelligent Agent designed the universe”. Hang on I thought this was evidence?

There is then a discussion about detecting the non-physical. Here we get told that love is something we cant measure, but we can see the effect this love has on someone. This is the rationale on which god will be proved….just one problem. Love has a chemical basis, so there is direct proof for love and not indirect as the author claims. Hmm, so why is there no direct evidence for god?

So now the author gets into the evidence for design, and I will try keep my replies to one short paragraph regarding the 10 sets of evidence.

1) The Big Bang – Not sure how this is evidence for design? Really, I am stumped any comments will be appreciated, I have no idea how the Big Bang can be used as evidence for design.

2) Excess Quarks – So the fact that the universe exists is proof for god? No its just proof that the universe exists, and its not fine tuning by a designer.

3) Large, just right-sized universe - So the fact that the universe exists is proof for god? No its just proof that the universe exists, and its not fine tuning by a designer.

4) Early evolution of the universe - So the fact that the universe exists is proof for god? No its just proof that the universe exists, and its not fine tuning by a designer.
And when a scientist uses the word miraculous, they do not mean god. Miraculous, could just mean something outstanding.

5) Just right laws of physics - So the fact that the universe exists is proof for god? No its just proof that the universe exists, and its not fine tuning by a designer.

6) Universal probability bounds – Ok, I am calling godandscience out on the lie here. I have never heard of a “absolute physical limit for improbable events”. Please what is this? The reference given here is to Planks constant, and nothing about published data on absolute physical limits can be found in a Google search. Oh and again
So the fact that the universe exists is proof for god? No its just proof that the universe exists, and its not fine tuning by a designer.

7) What do cosmologists say? -  Some Cosmologists saying they believe in a god is not evidence! And Let me say I am not even sure if these statements are endorsing god or just the use of a word that the author deems godly.

8) Speculative "solutions" to the design "problem" – Okay here is something that is scientific, it’s a criticism of the multi-universe theory. So this is a scientific criticism, but still not proof for god. If ever criticism was proof for god, well there would be way to many proofs.

9) Theistic solution - measurable design – Occam’s razor and what others believe is not evidence for god. I refrain from getting into Occam’s razor here, as it’s a philosophical argument, and we are just looking for the evidence.

10) Who created God? – Here we get the god excuse. God exists outside the bounds of physics etc etc etc….. in other words we can never prove the existence of god. Well done, you just said you can’t prove gods existence.

As I said in the last sentence, there has been no evidence presented for the existence of god, so well done godandscience you lied to us…..again.