Wednesday, 3 July 2013

godandscience X

In the latest edition of the pseudo science website godandscience.org we are looking at the so called fine tuning. Or should I say the belief by theists that god fine tunes the Universe.

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/designun.html

Right of the bat, we realize again what kind of website we are dealing with as the author has this to say.
"However, the idea that the universe is all is not a scientific fact, but an assumption based upon materialistic naturalism."
No, where is the evidence for there been more than the universe. This is an assumption based on the fact that it can never be proved or disproved. So it is dishonest if I can prove things about the universe, then if you wish to claim about things beyond the universe you need to be able to prove it.

Then this cracker of a statement
"Evidence shows that the constants of physics have been finely tuned to a degree not possible through human engineering."
No, this is absurd. How can you use constants determined by scientists to talk about fine tuning. Scientists work out these values and now you insert god into the equation. Yet you have shown no proof for this god. So the constants of physics are worked out using science and not using god. There is no fine tuning.

For the rest of the article the author then goes in to explaining how big and complex the so called fine tuning values are. He also shows how if one of these values changes by less than 1 % that life could not exist. So many examples, but yet no reason as to why this is divine intervention.

Here is my conclusion regarding the fine tuning argument. It is ridiculous for the following reason:
If one of these values change then all the values will change as they affect each other. Then it is still possible that life could form. That is unless we think we are so special that every thing has to be the only way we know.

xxxxx
For you pleasure here are some cracking fine tuning examples that make me wonder how anyone can think this is a scientific website. BTW these are all cited examples of the fine tuning that make absolutely no sense 
age of the universe
 if older: no solar-type stars in a stable burning phase would exist in the right (for life) part of the galaxy
 if younger: solar-type stars in a stable burning phase would not yet have formed

average distance between stars
if larger: heavy element density would be too sparse for rocky planets to form
if smaller
: planetary orbits would be too unstable for life


uncertainty magnitude in the Heisenberg uncertainty principle
if smaller: oxygen transport to body cells would be too small and certain life-essential elements would be unstable
if larger: oxygen transport to body cells would be too great and certain life-essential elements would be unstable