Atheists

Getting to know more about a particular group

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Taff Lafferty
Apprentice
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 1:21 pm
Location: loughborough

Atheists

Post #1

Post by Taff Lafferty »

Surely the universe is too complex to "just exist," and must have been created by a God who "just exists."?
Taff Lafferty

I see you

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18080
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 14 times

Post #2

Post by Divine Insight »

I think you said that wrong, you should have said:

Surely the universe is too complex to "just exist," and must have been created by an infinitely more complex God who "just exists."?

O:)
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

User avatar
Taff Lafferty
Apprentice
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 1:21 pm
Location: loughborough

Post #3

Post by Taff Lafferty »

Taff Lafferty

I see you

User avatar
OnceConvinced
Savant
Posts: 8960
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 10:22 pm
Location: New Zealand
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 55 times
Contact:

Post #4

Post by OnceConvinced »

Just how complex is it really? It seems that everything breaks down to basic elements. Everything appears to have been built on these basic elements.

One thing's for sure, I find it easier to believe that there were basic elements that were always there and some of them had the ability to generate basic life, than to believe there is some magical all-knowing being who was always there who can make things out of nothing.

Society and its morals evolve and will continue to evolve. The bible however remains the same and just requires more and more apologetics and claims of "metaphors" and "symbolism" to justify it.

Prayer is like rubbing an old bottle and hoping that a genie will pop out and grant you three wishes.

There is much about this world that is mind boggling and impressive, but I see no need whatsoever to put it down to magical super powered beings.


Check out my website: Recker's World of Fantasy

puddleglum
Sage
Posts: 685
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 12:35 pm
Contact:

Post #5

Post by puddleglum »

[Replying to post 4 by OnceConvinced]
Just how complex is it really? It seems that everything breaks down to basic elements. Everything appears to have been built on these basic elements.
Everything is composed of basic elements but those elements are combined in complex ways that could not have happened by chance. All the literature that exists is composed of 26 basic elements, the letters of the alphabet, but writers were needed to combine those 26 elements in ways that make sense and communicate information.
His invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made.
Romans 1:20 ESV

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18080
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 14 times

Post #6

Post by Divine Insight »

puddleglum wrote: Everything is composed of basic elements but those elements are combined in complex ways that could not have happened by chance. All the literature that exists is composed of 26 basic elements, the letters of the alphabet, but writers were needed to combine those 26 elements in ways that make sense and communicate information.
Actually physics answers these questions.

Chemistry

To begin with, the elements did not come together in complex ways by pure chance. That is a misunderstanding of how physics and chemistry work. The elements came together in specific ways because it's the only way that can come together based upon their physical properties.

Of course, the elements themselves are very complex so I'm not saying that the elements can only come together ONE WAY only. There are clearly many different ways that elements can come together, but those ways are still limited and even "guided" by the physical and chemical properties of the elements.

One way to help understanding this is to think of a pair of dice. When you roll the dice only certain outcomes are possible. You either roll a 2 or a 12 or some WHOLE NUMBER in-between. You can never roll less than a 2 or more than 12. You can never roll a fractional or irrational number.

So looking at dice you might say, "How can it be possible that by just tossing dice randomly I ALWAYS end up with a WHOLE NUMBER from 2 to 12?" How could that be happening by PURE RANDOM CHANCE? Well, it happens because of the physical properties of the dice. This is simply all they can produce.

In a similar way, the natural elements can only combine in specific ways (albeit far more complex ways than a pair of dice) but still not totally random. Moreover, because of their physical properties there are configurations that they are far more likely to take on than others. This is why H2O for example becomes either Water, Ice, or Steam, and hardly ever anything else. Like the dice, this molecular configuration can only "Roll" certain configurations.

This basic principle continues to apply even as molecules become increasingly complex. It is actually this FACT of nature that allows us to create the "Periodic Table of the Elements" and predict the probability of chemical reactions with great precision. This makes the study of Chemistry possible.

If you've ever taken a course in Chemistry, and especially Organic Chemistry you will quickly learn that the elements do not just come together randomly at all. So suggesting that this is just "pure chance" is simply wrong.

The Truth of Entropy

Physics is also another subject that is quite fascinating to learn about. Many people, especially theists totally misunderstand the Second Law of Thermodynamic more commonly known as "Entropy".

They are often told that entropy simply states that our universe is constantly deteriorating into a state of chaos. But this is grossly in error.

Entropy is a complex law of Thermodynamics. Yes, it's true that in an isolated (or closed) system entropy must always increase (in other words, in a closed system things must ultimately head toward a state of disorder) when they physically can.

Therefore our universe "as a whole" must necessarily be "winding down". Remember this is a law of thermodynamics and is actually stating that our universe is "cooling down".

However, entropy actually predicts precisely the OPPOSITE of this when HEAT (or energy) is added to a system from an external source. Well, the Earth is not a closed system. The Earth is basking in the radiation of the Sun and is being warmed by this energy. Therefore Entropy actually states that this configuration can drive things to becoming more "organized" or become more complex configurations that represent a higher state of energy.

In short, Entropy actually requires that chemistry on Earth must become more complex naturally.

So ironically Entropy is actually driving the evolution of complex chemistry on planet Earth. Precisely the opposite of what most theists have been taught to believe.

Nothing is happening by "pure random chance" exactly. Sure to make a molecule of water, ice, or steam it is required that two hydrogen atoms bump into an oxygen atom. That much is indeed a "random occurrence". But when that happens it's not random at all that "Water" is formed.

Moreover, the water molecule itself then becomes "stable" and further random bumping does not continue to create H30 or H40, or any other combinations of hydrogen and oxygen. H2O has become stable already. Not by random chance, but because this how hydrogen and oxygen behave.

So you could say that the formation of molecular water is "not by random chance" but rather it's because these are the properties of hydrogen and oxygen.

Of course water does not constitute more complex molecular configurations. None the less, this same principle applies to all molecular configurations. So once you understand why water is not "just pure random chance" then you should be prepared to understand why this is true of all molecular configurations.

And ENTROPY actually DRIVES this process. In other words, the energy from the Sun warming the earth DRIVES this process.

So the evolution of complex molecular arrangements on earth is not just pure chance. That's a totally misguided idea that results from not understanding Physics and Chemistry.

~~~~~~~

Summary Conclusion

If there was anything we could point to that we might say was "random chance" it would need to be the actual "Laws of Physics" themselves, (or simply the behavior of the stuff of the universe as a whole).

But in terms of molecular life evolving on planet earth there is no need for any authors to "Guide this Alphabet Soup". If there was an author to this universe he wrote it on the "Dice" before he tossed them out in the Big Bang. And everything that naturally evolves in this universe is just a "Number" that naturally comes up on those cosmic dice. No authors are required to actually write those numbers down after the dice have been thrown. The numbers are innate to the "Dice".

So if there is an author to this universe, he wrote it so that it can evolve on its own. He wouldn't need to be a "baby-sitting author" writing the story as it unfolds.

I sincerely hope that the information in this post has not been a waste of time in the writing. :D

Physics, Chemistry, and the observation that our universe evolves into complex forms does not deny a cosmic author. But it does reveal to us that if there is an author, that author designed the dice that became the universe. There simply is no need for the author to actually write out everything the universe actually does.

Our universe naturally evolves into complex forms, so complex that they can even become what we call "Sentient Living Beings".

No intervening authors required.
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18080
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 14 times

Post #7

Post by Divine Insight »

puddleglum wrote: [Replying to post 4 by OnceConvinced]
Just how complex is it really? It seems that everything breaks down to basic elements. Everything appears to have been built on these basic elements.
Everything is composed of basic elements but those elements are combined in complex ways that could not have happened by chance. All the literature that exists is composed of 26 basic elements, the letters of the alphabet, but writers were needed to combine those 26 elements in ways that make sense and communicate information.
From a Purely Philosophical and Theological Perspective

Also on a more abstract level, how would these supernatural authors actually work?

Would they need to be monitoring everything all the time and doing things like,

Write in a little more water over there.

Write in a little more air over here.

Write in a more stable weather pattern.

Write in a single cell bacteria for starters, so that we as the authors can "evolve" that into human beings eventually as our story becomes more complex.

~~~~~~~

Seriously. It's a valid question. "Who are these supernatural authors?", and "How do they write this stuff into the universe?"

In this modern day and age I supposed we can think of reality as a computer simulation and the authors as being busy computer programmers who are writing out the simulation as it unfolds. However, even earthly mortal computer programmers would tell you that when they write a computer simulation even thy don't need to baby-sit it as an active author. They simply write the simulation to evolve on its own. So even "authors" who write simulations don't write them in a way that they would need to constantly tell the simulation every little thing.

Therefore if there was a supernatural "Computer Programmer" who wrote the universe as a simulation, it would still be most likely that this "Creator Programmer" would have written the simulation to evolve on its own.

It truly doesn't even make any abstract theological sense to imagine a God who needs to baby-sit and author every little thing that happens in the universe.

So even from a purely theological point of view a "Baby-Sitting God Author" makes no sense.
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

User avatar
Taff Lafferty
Apprentice
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 1:21 pm
Location: loughborough

Post #8

Post by Taff Lafferty »

i like science but whats the timescale for this development, and how can we trust the scientists when they cant agree if butter is good for you.
Taff Lafferty

I see you

User avatar
Tired of the Nonsense
Site Supporter
Posts: 5680
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:01 pm
Location: USA

Post #9

Post by Tired of the Nonsense »

OnceConvinced wrote: Just how complex is it really? It seems that everything breaks down to basic elements. Everything appears to have been built on these basic elements.

One thing's for sure, I find it easier to believe that there were basic elements that were always there and some of them had the ability to generate basic life, than to believe there is some magical all-knowing being who was always there who can make things out of nothing.
Certain quanta, up quarks, down quarks, and electrons, vibrate at different frequencies. We refer to this vibration as being either positive or negative. Quanta with differing vibrations are attracted to each other, while quanta with like vibrations are repelled by each other. This attraction/repulsion phenomenon is the basis of quantum mechanics, which is itself the basis for all change. Over time the various ways that this phenomenon manages to make stars and planets and black holes and the like is quite spectacular and can become quite complex. At it's most basic level however it is just a binary system, either-or, zeros and ones. From either-or entire universes are made.
Image "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this." -- Albert Einstein -- Written in 1954 to Jewish philosopher Erik Gutkind.

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18080
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 14 times

Post #10

Post by Divine Insight »

Taff Lafferty wrote: i like science but whats the timescale for this development, and how can we trust the scientists when they cant agree if butter is good for you.
Science is not the basis of atheism. In fact, there is nothing in science at all that actually denies the potential existence of a creator entity. Although it is true that science has certainly removed the need for a creator God in order to explain the complexity of universe.

Consider your original question of this thread:

Surely the universe is too complex to "just exist," and must have been created by a God who "just exists."?

Science has explained sufficiently how the universe can easily become as complex as we see it today given the original subatomic phenomena and the basic laws of physics. Science does not claim to know why or how the universe began with this specific potential. And therefore science cannot rule out a possible "creator/designer". Although there are very good reasons to believe that no designer would be required.

In any case, what science does seem to have sufficiently shown is that there is definitely no need for a "baby-sitting" creator or "God" who would need to reach into the universe and change things with intent. The laws of physics appear to be more than sufficient to produce the desired results.

There are concepts of a "Creator" or "God" if you like that are compatible with all known science. So science itself does not even suggest atheism actually. This false dichotomy is actually the creation of those who support various Abraham religions such as Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Often referred to as the "Biblical God". (even though they have different names for their books, and their claims about this God disagree on many points)

One thing they do seem to all agree on is that their God has instructed men to cut off the foreskin on the penises of all males. This is also known as circumcision.

That fact right there should expose the fallacy of all of these religious myths. Why would a Designer God who can change things on the fly expect men to correct a mistake in made when designing their penises? This makes absolutely no sense at all.

So there is no need to even appeal to science to see that these Abrahamic (or Biblical) religions are all clearly false. If there exists a God it's not likely to be like the Biblical God at all. A God concept described by Buddhism is far more likely to be true, if any God concept is true.

But no science doesn't proclaim atheism to be necessarily the case. As far as science is concerned Buddhism* could be 100% true and this wouldn't conflict with any known science.

* Note: When I say Buddhism I'm speaking of the core philosophy, not of any specific beliefs any particular Buddhist sects might claim. It is an unfortunate truth that all religions tend to become specific and start making claims that were never intended in the original core philosophies. People have a tendency to anthropomorphize the concept of a "God" and they can't seem to keep from doing this no matter how abstract and mystical a religious philosophy may have original begun.

In short, science can say nothing against the concept of a "God" that is said to have created the "Big Bang" and then never touched a thing after that. Well, I guess they can say one thing ---- "Where's the evidence for this God?"

The Big Bang itself is not evidence for anything other than a Big Bang. ;)

But we know that it's highly unlikely the any God capable of creating a universe would not know how to correctly design a male penis. So the Biblical God is out. O:)

No science required for that one.
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

Post Reply