Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Atheist cosmologist warns “deeply religious” people not to put their faith in “apparent” fine-tuning
Uncommon Descent ^ | 02/24/2017

Posted on 02/25/2017 6:54:04 AM PST by SeekAndFind

In “Physics: A cosmos in the lab,” a review of A Big Bang in a Little Room: The Quest to Create New Universes by Zeeya Merali, cosmologist Andreas Albrecht writes at Nature,

The question of cosmic origins, and the possibility that humans might create new universes, can connect with religious concerns. These form a substantial thread through A Big Bang in a Little Room that significantly reduced the book’s appeal to me. I am an atheist. I respect that many people are deeply religious (some are very close to me) and that religion can have a positive, even beautiful, role. And I know many religious people who do superb science. But I find most attempts to connect religious questions with the fundamental questions of physics and cosmology (or vice versa) deeply unsatisfying.

Does your favourite interpretation of quantum mechanics or apparent fine-tuning of the fundamental constants provide evidence for or against a divine creator? Deeply religious people know better than to leave something so important to them to fads in physics. And when people do engage in these debates, they seem to find a reason to believe what they want to believe, regardless of how the science unfolds.
More.

Rubbish. Fine-tuning is the most obvious fact of the universe and efforts to undermine the evidence for it have driven crackpot cosmology for decades. The crackpots now turn on the very idea of evidence to protect their position.

First, no one cares what Dr. Albrecht finds “deeply unsatisfying”; he can find himself another universe if he likes, and take his fads in physics with him.

Second, “deeply religious people” feel constrained by facts, evidence, and truthfulness, not by the view—attractive to so many Darwinian atheists—that “evolution” bred a sense of reality out of us.

The choice matters to science and we fear we know which one most of them have made.

By the way, why are atheists so solicitous about theists who, they fear, will lose their faith? The reality is that the only faith many of us are rapidly losing is in government of science by atheists. Take the unstoppable crises of peer review, for example.

Why are we better off with science’s affairs run by people who believe that if they win they survive and that none of us evolved so as to grasp reality anyway?

Note: We confess we don’t know why all this sounds like BioLogos on steroids either.

See also: Evolution bred a sense of reality out of us

Ethan Siegel tackles fine-tuning at Forbes

and

Copernicus, you are not going to believe who is using your name. Or how.



TOPICS: Religion & Culture; Religion & Science
KEYWORDS: atheismandstate; atheistsupremacist; cosmology; finetuning; sitdownandshutup; universe
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last

1 posted on 02/25/2017 6:54:04 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Quantum entanglement offers quite a bit of evidence for God to me.


2 posted on 02/25/2017 6:59:08 AM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“Darwinian atheists” he says. Darwin wasn’t an atheist.


3 posted on 02/25/2017 6:59:45 AM PST by Telepathic Intruder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

It’s a shame he isn’t an atheist cosmetologist; that way he would at least have a better foundation to use in his work, if not in his beliefs.


4 posted on 02/25/2017 7:05:29 AM PST by chajin ("There is no other name under heaven given among people by which we must be saved." Acts 4:12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“First, no one cares what Dr. Albrecht finds “deeply unsatisfying”; he can find himself another universe if he likes, and take his fads in physics with him.”

My thoughts exactly. Why are atheists so d@mned militant about `correcting’ the beliefs of religious people?


5 posted on 02/25/2017 7:08:08 AM PST by elcid1970 ("The Second Amendment is more important than Islam. Buy ammo.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; All

There are two prominent scientists in the fields of cosmology and quantum mechanics who give people of faith plenty of reason for hope. They are cosmologist Paul Davies and quantum mechanics expert Lothar Schafer.

Suggested reading...

The Matter Myth, by Paul Davies
https://www.amazon.com/Matter-Myth-Discoveries-Challenge-Understanding/dp/0743290917

In Search of Divine Reality: Science as a Source of Inspiration, by Lothar Schafer - 1997
https://www.amazon.com/Search-Divine-Reality-Science-Inspiration/dp/1557284687/ref=la_B001K8P4FM_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1488035147&sr=1-1


6 posted on 02/25/2017 7:09:05 AM PST by ETL (Trump admin apparently playing "good cop, bad cop" with thug Putin (see my FR Home page))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onedoug
Quantum entanglement offers quite a bit of evidence for God to me.

It seems like a miracle to me. Unexplainable on any level.

7 posted on 02/25/2017 7:12:05 AM PST by BipolarBob (Lead us not into temptation. Just point us in the general direction and we'll find it ourselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Dawkins already wrote a book with the same thesis in “The Grand Delusion”.


8 posted on 02/25/2017 7:26:04 AM PST by rusty schucklefurd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rusty schucklefurd

9 posted on 02/25/2017 7:29:47 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Telepathic Intruder

“Darwinian atheists” does not refer directly to Charles Darwin’s personal views on God - it now describes atheists who are committed to Darwinian Materialism - the view that life, by chance, spontaneously came into being from non-life by some purely naturalistic means.


10 posted on 02/25/2017 7:33:05 AM PST by rusty schucklefurd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Thanks. I will check out that book. I can also recommend two books refuting atheism from a philosophical and scientific viewpoint entitled, “Stealing from God” by Frank Turek and “I Don’t have Enough Faith to Be and Atheist “ also by Frank Turek and Norman Geisler


11 posted on 02/25/2017 7:36:42 AM PST by rusty schucklefurd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: rusty schucklefurd

Sorry for the misspelling - it should be, “I Don’t Have Enough Faih to Be An Atheist”.


12 posted on 02/25/2017 7:39:46 AM PST by rusty schucklefurd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Man, the author is awfully defensive and bitter.

What’s up with that?


13 posted on 02/25/2017 7:39:53 AM PST by semimojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onedoug

Entanglement, I’ve conjectured may be the border (or barrier) from our present physical reality into another dimension but maybe even into the spirit world, just where we only begin to perceive some hint of it, maybe only mathematically,


14 posted on 02/25/2017 7:39:57 AM PST by captmar-vell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: semimojo

Merely intellectual arrogance and ‘kicking against the goads’ same as this kind always does,


15 posted on 02/25/2017 7:45:32 AM PST by captmar-vell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: rusty schucklefurd

And who is nature’s God that is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence? Darwin was a scientist who believed in causality, but that doesn’t rule out the existence of God. Some might say you can’t be both a scientist and a Christian, yet God created a world that operates by scientific means. To Him there is no controversy.


16 posted on 02/25/2017 7:46:09 AM PST by Telepathic Intruder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: semimojo

I’ve not read the book Seek and Find recommended, but I can tell you that Frank Turek in “Stealing from God” is not that way. I don’t like it either when debaters use “snark” attitude when presenting their opposing view to each other. It’s not helpful to clear thinking, at least it seems that way to me.


17 posted on 02/25/2017 7:49:44 AM PST by rusty schucklefurd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Those of us given the gift of faith see the universe God has made through the eyes of that faith. It leads us to exult in the words of the psalm, “ O Lord, our Lord, how majestic your name is in all the earth!” (Psalm 8:9). We stand in awe of all He has created and that He allows us to experience in our brief life on His planet before we live an eternal life with Him in Heaven.


18 posted on 02/25/2017 7:50:19 AM PST by txrefugee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Telepathic Intruder

Re: “Darwin was a scientist who believed in causality, but that doesn’t rule out the existence of God. Some might say you can’t be both a scientist and a Christian, yet God created a world that operates by scientific means. To Him there is no controversy.”

I agree with you. It’s interesting that you bring up “causality” because I think it is the atheistic view that denies the law of causality when it comes to the origin of the universe.

The Big Bang definitely demonstrates that the universe, time, and space had a beginning - something came from nothing. If nothing existed prior to the Big Bang, no physical laws, no “natural” forces - how could the appearance of the universe be a “natural” event? Something had to cause the universe - if it indeed had a beginning. The theistic view that a Being, outside of time and space, of immense power, who designed and fine-tuned the universe so as to permit it’s very existence seems more plausible to me than that something came from nothing by nothing for nothing.


19 posted on 02/25/2017 8:02:23 AM PST by rusty schucklefurd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: rusty schucklefurd

Yes, I’ve heard theories about how the universe could “spring from nothing”, but scientifically the Big Bang is open territory. Saying “God did it” is just as valid as any atheist’s theory in this case. The Vatican’s official view is that the Big Bang was “day 1” of creation.


20 posted on 02/25/2017 8:07:28 AM PST by Telepathic Intruder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson