meester_bond (meester_bond) wrote,
meester_bond
meester_bond

Me vs Scott Part 4 Fine-tuning

This is interesting. Because it's exactly these forms of studies that have pointed to the incredible fine-tuning of the initial conditions of the universe. And it's not merely Christians who are claiming this. Most cosmologists, Christian or otherwise, scratch their heads over this extraordinary finding in nature. The same can be said for the evidence pointing to the beginning of the universe out of non-being and other areas.


Is the universe fine tuned or are we fine tuned for the universe? No one fine tunes the pot hole to the water the water has properties that allow it to perfectly fit the pot hole.

Cosmological constants in no way imply that the universe was somehow fine-tuned for life, only that life is fine-tuned for the universe. If the cosmological constants were different, then the universe would likely exist in a substantially different form, and likely some intelligent life form would eventually arise claiming how ITS particular universe’s constants are proof of fine-tuning. If the universe were so fine-tuned for life, then why is 99.999999999999999999% of it incredibly hospital of it, and life has only been able to grab a toehold (as far as we know) for the last 3.5 billion out of 13.75 billion years that the universe has likely been around. If the universe were made and tuned just for the purpose of life, it needs a little more fine-tuning so it doesn’t have such a nasty habit of killing it.

You do realize that your particular train of thought has been shot down repeatedly, don’t you? If the universe happened to have other conditions, then we would be different as well, or if the conditions were so far off, then the universe wouldn’t exist. It’s like throwing a pair of sixes and saying that it must be preordained because otherwise a pair of ones would have lost the game.

Can you please go read about the weak anthropic principle - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle ? Please.

I reject the notion that our universe is finely tuned to be suitable for life. The vast majority of the universe is hostile to life as we know it, and existed for billions of years before life arose on earth. That’s crap tuning, in my opinion.

You know what those cosmologists did after scratching their heads? They get back to work trying to find more answers. You know what’s not helpful? Saying “God did it, case closed.”

Also, this could just as easily be irrefutable proof that the forebears of Almighty Zeus created the Universe, as opposed to your Christian God. However, I have one nagging question: Can you show that these values could be otherwise, or alternatively , that these are the only values that could work? (Or that, having set up the system, the Flying Spaghetti Monster didn’t retire from the scene?)

The fine tuning argument is among the most annoying arguments Goddists make, since the entire universe does its best to destroy every bit of life there is. It is only through thousands of generations of fine tuning BY LIVING THINGS that makes it possible to be alive at all.

I wonder if the fact that we, as individuals in a modern society, don’t have to have the fight for survival in our faces every minute gives these silly people the idea that the universe is somehow perfect for us. What a ridiculous notion. We are largely insulated from having our fragility rubbed in our faces every single day because of the efforts of thousands of human minds, over a period of millennia (but especially in the last 200 years or so), who learn what we needed to know to make staying alive a little easier…for a while.

Just one other thing. I infer from the above quote of yours that the fine-tuning of the universe is an important feature in your justification for your religious faith. Please do correct me on that if I’m mistaken, I do not wish to misrepresent your views.

Given that you’ve identified as an ID and Christian science proponent, I’m sure you’re already familiar with Douglas Adams’ concept of the intelligent puddle as being illustrative of some of the problems in the view of fine tuning. I’m interested in your views on that counter-argument.

Here it is reproduced, in case you need a refresher:


"This is rather as if you imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, ‘This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn’t it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!’ This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, frantically hanging on to the notion that everything’s going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for."
Tags: reliability bible
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic
  • 0 comments