Friday, September 26, 2008

Thank God for Science

I’ve called this post “Thank God for Science” but I was tempted to call it, “The Dawning of Atheist Mythology.”

To begin, I want to quote from Joseph Heller’s book, “Good as Gold.” In my opinion, this book is far superior to his best seller - “Catch 22.” In fact it’s the best bit of political satire that I’ve ever read. Extremely funny stuff. The context of the quote is the main character Julius Gold trying to drive his older brother crazy by making nonsensical statements. In this instance he says, “Is it ever good that we found ourselves on a planet where there’s water. Otherwise we’d have to always drink beer or wine.” Well, ok, it’s one of those, you had to be there kind of things. Really, it was funny.

Here’s is a quote however by Princeton physicist Freeman Dyson that to me is even more hilarious. In his comment,
- He’s referring to the constants and values that hold the cosmos together.
- He’s referring to the relationship between these constants that allow our biosphere to not only exist but to support intelligent life.

Mr. Dyson says, “There are many lucky accidents in physics. Without such lucky accidents, life as we know it would be impossible.”

If you can’t see the humour in that chances are very good that you’re an atheist. Let me fill in the blanks for you. While I’m at it I’ll explain some of the reasons why I’m so grateful for science.

) If it wasn’t for science, the only evidence that we’d have for God being the prime uncaused cause of the beginning of the universe would be the Bible saying that Creator God is the Cause.
- Because of science, we know that whatever begins to exist has a cause.
- Because of science we know that whatever begins to exist has an explanation of its cause either in the necessity of itself or in an external cause.

) If it wasn’t for science, we'd have never known, apart from the Bible, that Creator God designed our universe in a way that is perfectly suited for our existence.
- Because of science, we now know that what at first looks like arbitrary and unrelated constants are in reality tied to each other by one and only one common denominator. These seemingly random constants are set precisely as they need to be, and they are related to each other precisely as they need to be related to each other so that there could evolve carbon based intelligent life - namely, us.
- Because of science we now know that if the values and quantities that are present in our universe weren’t exactly as they are, our universe would not exist at all. If it wasn’t for these scientific discoveries we’d only have the Bible to tell us that this universe was created in precisely its present form so that we could come to life.

) If it wasn’t for science we’d have never known, apart from the Bible telling us so, that the universe had a beginning. Until this discovery, atheists were comfortably smug in the belief that our universe had always existed “as is” forever and ever. Now, because of scientific discoveries, it’s not just the Bible that tells us that the universe has a beginning.
- Because of science and the discovery of the rapidly expanding universe, it isn’t just the Bible that says our universe had a beginning.
- Because of science and the discovery of “red shift” it isn’t just the Bible that says our universe had a beginning.
- Because of science and the discovery of background radiation, it isn’t just the Bible that says our universe had a beginning.
- Because of science and the discovery of the entropy levels in the universe, it isn’t just the Bible that says our universe had a beginning.

) If it wasn’t for science, we might believe the lie that our universe evolved or grew into a place where these values, constants and quantities became just right for intelligent life to be possible.
- Because of science we have more than just the Bible to let us know that the exquisitely precise values and quantities had to have been “put into” the equation before the singularity began.

Ok, enough for the basics. I know you’re getting antsy so let’s get around to the part that shows how lucky we are to have found ourselves on a planet with water.

What scientists have found, much to their amazement and chagrin is something they refer to as fine-tuning. Fine-tuning is a neutral secular term that refers to the constants and quantities (atomic weight, gravitational constant, strong and weak force, etc.) being exactly right for the existence of intelligent life. This fine-tuning exists in roughly four areas:

a) The fine-tuning of the laws of physics

b) The fine-tuning of the constants of physics

c) The fine-tuning of the initial conditions of the universe and

d) The fine-tuning of certain higher-level features of the universe

Science has made it possible for us to know these things. In fact, if it wasn’t for science, we wouldn’t know things like:

. If the gravity, being 10 to the power of 33 weaker than electromagnetism, was instead weaker by only 10 to the power of 39, stars would be a billion times less massive and would burn a million times faster, thereby making life in our universe impossible.

. If the nuclear strong force was different by even 2%, protons would not have formed.

. If the mass between a proton and a neutron were not exactly as they are, again, no life and probably no universe.

. If the nuclear weak force wasn’t exactly 10 to the power of 28, we would have only helium instead of hydrogen.

Are you feeling lucky yet?

. What scientists, what ATHEIST scientists call an “astonishing coincidence” is the fact that prior to the Big Bang, the ratio of the strong force to electromagnetism had to have been exactly as it was or else at 10 to -17 seconds after the start of the singularity, the necessary binding of helium-4, beryllium-8 and carbon-12 would not have occurred and life as we know it would not have appeared.

. The exact number and types of neutrinos at 1 second of the beginning of the Big Bang had to be in place or the expansion rate would have prohibited the formation of our universe.

. If the mass of a neutron were slightly increased by about one part in seven hundred, then stable hydrogen burning stars would cease to exist.

. If the strong force were a long-range force (like electromagnetism or gravity) instead of a short range force that only acts between protons and neutrons in the nucleus, all matter would either instantaneously undergo nuclear fusion and explode or be sucked together forming a black hole.

Pretty lucky for us, huh?

. If the Pauli-exclusion principle did not exist, all electrons would occupy the lowest atomic orbit, which would make complex chemical interactions impossible.

. If the quantization principle did not exist, there wouldn’t be any atomic orbits, electrons would be sucked into the nucleus and therefore no complex chemistry would be allowed.

. The gravitational constant must be exactly 10 to the power of 40 weaker than the strong nuclear force or again, no us. For those that are interested, that’s ten thousand, billion, billion, billion, billion times weaker than the strong force.

Pretty lucky for us that it just happened to work out that way.

. The cosmological constant must fall incredibly close to zero, relative to its natural range of values or again, no life in our universe. To make this easier to understand let me paint this picture for you. The natural range of life-permitting values is 0 - 10 to the power of 53 or from
0 - 10,0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000000.

If this number was conceptualized as a dartboard, the dartboard would extended across our entire galaxy. Now, the target that needs to be hit within this galaxy wide dart board is less than 2.5 centimetres in diameter. Listen up now because here comes what atheists call the really lucky part. The amount of fine-tuning of the cosmological constant, one that we come upon, according to atheists, by accident is like blindfolding yourself, spinning around ten times and then randomly throwing the dart at our galaxy wide dart board and hitting the target exactly in the centre of its 2.5 centimetre disk.

Obviously, atheists fancy themselves to be very lucky people. It’s no wonder they’re so happy.

Perhaps you’re not convinced, so let me use a different, more impressive example.

. Unless the levels of entropy at the beginning of the universe were incredibly low - no universe. This requires an extraordinarily precise arrangement of mass and energy. To hit this exactly right by accident, we would take another dart board.
. This one as wide as the visible universe.
. This time we would put on our blindfold, spin around ten times, and according to atheists, throw a dart randomly at the universe sized dart board and hit the exact correct PROTON.

If, by this point your mind isn’t numb with the credulity and gullibility that atheists force themselves to live with, I just don’t know what it would take to get you to throw up your hands and demand that atheists get out of the education business. I mean, just how blind does a person have to be before s/he willingly stops demanding the right to drive the car?

This is not a joking matter any more. Atheist scientists have discovered this information. They know it, but obviously maintaining their bias against Creator God is worth throwing away their integrity. It’s embarrassing. It’s shameful. It should be a crime for them to teach “The Universe As An Accident” to your children.

Because of science, we have more than just the Bible to tell us that all of these variables had to be in place, exactly as they are before the beginning of the Big Bang. Only an atheist would suggest that such design does not require a Designer. Are you open minded enough to see that anyone who says that we’re here by accident has to have some other reason driving such a preposterous claim, namely an irrational commitment to denying the existence of God. Some people are hard to impress so let me make this a little be more visual for you.

Atheist Stephen Hawking, has calculated that the odds of our universe coming into being by accident is 1 chance in 10,0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000, 0000000000.

How lucky are you feeling now? Because I gotta tell you, if you think that our mathematically precise universe with its exquisitely exact constants and quantities that are related to each other only in their need to support life on this planet happened by accident, then I gotta tell you, the Bible’s description of you being a Fool is how you should be feeling. As is evident on a daily basis, intelligence is not synonymous with wisdom.

For what it’s worth, atheist Stephen Hawking likes those odds. He has been gifted with an amazing intellect and he is using it and the rest of his life to override his own admission that it "sure looks like the universe had a Creator." Some of the strangest and mythical hypothesis in the scientific community today, to explain how our universe did not need a beginning come from Mr. Hawking. I find that just fantastically sad.

Now, there is no small degree of humour and irony in all this for the Christian. To have science, more specifically, to have atheist influenced and biassed science make such a clear case for Creator God can’t help but put a smile on one’s face. And to see such a discovery driving atheists to incoherent babbling almost brings a tear to the eye. Because God cannot be allowed into the atheist scientist’s field of observation we find intelligent women and men positing things like:

. Inflation theories

. Baby universe theories

. Multi universe theories

. Oscillating universe theories

. Gaia theory

. We’re just a quantum particle theory

. Parallel universe theories

. Bubble universe theories

. Chaotic universe theories and on and on and on and on, literally ad nauseam.

The underlying hypothesis in all of this, and a fallacious one at that, is that lots and lots of time changes impossible into possible and even, for hard core atheists, time changes impossible into probable. And it seems that it is always those who don’t understand probabilities who claim that the highly improbable, probably happened. Richard Dawkins, would have you believe that intelligent life has come into being “billions” of times in billions of life-supporting universes. Without even the hint of a smile or a shifting of the eyes, Dawkins will tell you that life-supporting universes are more common than life-prohibiting universes. Tell people what they want to hear and the money roles in. His cynicism seemingly knows no bounds.

Random change did not, does not and will not engender order no matter how many billions or trillions of years we give it. Rather than a scientific conclusion, random change producing order is nothing but an atheistic assumption, one that comes with absolutely no supporting evidence. However, so great is the need to avoid, at all costs the inclusion or even the mention of a Creator God that a sad and pitiful scene is unfolding before our very eyes. Proponents of a godless universe are reducing themselves to throwing out one ridiculous hypothesis after another, all in a vain attempt to avoid the conclusion to which current scientific evidence is now pointing - Creator God exists and He is the reason for our existence. Our perfectly ordered universe is so confounding to atheist scientists that they find themselves positing billions of less ordered universes in order to explain away the one perfectly ordered universe which we inhabit. The atheist’s inability to explain away God is so disconcerting that Steven Weinberg once said, “As we make progress understanding the expanding universe, the problem itself expands, so that the solution always seems to recede from us.”

And now, wonder of wonders, we have atheists, who have laughed at Christianity as being based on mythology, themselves grovelling in mythologies of their own. None, absolutely none of the various theories that I displayed above have any supporting evidence for their existence. They are figments of atheist imagination. Multiverses and the like are purely speculative, undetected and undetectable. There is nothing observable, repeatable, verifiable or testable about them. And what’s even more disconcerting is that atheist scientists and their atheist followers seem to prefer it that way. Given current evidence, reality has become a place that's too scary for atheists to set foot. What’s worse, these atheist scientists seem to believe, they seem to REALLY believe that postulating infinite, invisible universes makes a persuasive argumentation for the non existence of God. The greatest irony of all is that the final defence against an argument for Creator God is the creation of atheist mythology.

I’m getting too angry, so I’ll close with a quote from Bertrand Russel, one of my favourite atheists to read when I need a smile.

“The scientific temper of mind is cautious, tentative, and piecemeal. The way in which science arrives at its beliefs is quite different from that of theology. Science starts, not from large assumptions, but from particular facts discovered by observation or experiment.”

“Is it ever good that we found ourselves on a planet where there’s water. Otherwise we’d always have to drink beer or wine.”

Ya. Good luck with that.

No comments: