Atheist scientists asking for help with their Elephant

[SivartM]

I've heard of people who have rejected anything like their childhood religion, and people who eventually went back with enthusiasm. I think it depends on individual circumstances and psychology; it's not something I would be dogmatic about, but I think it's interesting why people end up believing what they do.

[BobRyan]

The distinctly religious nature of the atheists argument for a "multiverse" to "avoid God" is every bit the thing that Collin Patterson complained about in his own review of their dilemma.

What many do not know about our atheist scientist friends - is that they have been plagued by a string of "just so story telling" and were trying to find a way out when low and behold - an elephant showed up.

Before we get to the elephant - remember that "just so stories" are equivalent to the "thunderstorm wrote my term paper" argument. Holding to such an thunderstorm solution - no matter how illogical that seems - since "my term paper exists", is one of the ways they have tried to solve their small scale problems at the 1% level.

Video shows Atheist Scientists confess to non-science need for non-God solutions

http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=4773590301316220374#docid=-7044753105944203252

A QUICK guide through the 45 min video:

Intro - play first 2:30 min:seconds. Then skip to next

Start

at 11:30 – The Tuning argument begins

13:50 – scientist hate the idea of being created – of the tuned universe.

(Dark energy vs the Higgs field energy)

15:00 the “just so” story telling confronted by 15:50 ultimate tuning factor

17:00 fine tuning – 1% “just luck – 1.. 1 part in 1 / 10^120 – the most extreme example of fine tuning!!

18:20 – the alternative to blind luck at 1/10^20 was “impossible to contemplate” for atheists!!

19:30 – A designer – “a notion that the atheists did not want to entertain”! END

The explanation/solution for the problem so troubling to actual open minded atheist scientists - was to "imagine" a multiverse so they could avoid the massive 10^120 sized ELEPHANT in their living room!

Hint - my Christian friends - share this one with your church.

in Christ,

Bob

[SivartM]

Since when do theoretical physicists = atheists? Since when does being an atheist mean you really just don't like God and try to scramble to explain the very existence of the universe? I think that multiverse theory is interesting (an awesome idea, and even if it's not true it's ripe for storytelling!), and it doesn't contradict a belief in God. Science means learning about the universe by forming theories that are not simply based on tradition. If there are other universes we may eventually be able to find them. If multiverse theory is proven true, atheists will be happy and Christians will interpret it as demonstrating the amazing power of the God who transcends all universes.

[CoAspen]

[Dr. Shane]

You limited your criteria. Maybe the fact that there is no "sure thing" reveals that nobody knows.

That is exactly what it means. Nobody knows. I guess some could call me an agnostic that chooses to believe. I choose what I choose because it seems the most probable. It certainly seems more probable to me than life coming from non-life and everything coming from nothing.

[Dr. Shane]

If there are other universes we may eventually be able to find them.

If Adventist doctrine is correct, we will most assuredly find them and perhaps even travel to them. Now isn't that cool? Given a choice to believe that someday all the stars will burn out and the universe will turn dark and cold OR that we will be able to travel to other universes... why not believe in the latter? I choose hope over darkness.

[SivartM]

If Adventist doctrine is correct, we will most assuredly find them and perhaps even travel to them. Now isn't that cool? Given a choice to believe that someday all the stars will burn out and the universe will turn dark and cold OR that we will be able to travel to other universes... why not believe in the latter? I choose hope over darkness.

Given that scientific projections point to the inevitable ending of our universe, perhaps one could imagine that everyone will just be moved to a brand new universe when this one's trillions of years are up. The death of a world needn't be dark and hopeless. Even if Adventist doctrine is wrong, I have a great hope that humans will find their way into a new universe and save life from extinction. With unlimited worlds there is unlimited possibility. I'm personally holding out for stumbling unexpectedly into Narnia.

[Dr. Shane]

Most Christians could not do the 12 steps. They would be too afraid. It requires a level of honesty and accountability most Christians are completely unaware of.

I think one could replace the word "Christians" with the word "people" and the above statement would be just as true. I once read in a publication that in an anonymous poll, only 15% of Adventists claimed to live what they profess to believe. Certainly most do not have the level of honesty required by the 12 Steps or by God for that matter. But neither does the population in general, so that is certainly not a unique trait of Christians.

[Dr. Shane]

I have a great hope that humans will find their way into a new universe and save life from extinction.

Without the help of a deity? Not to be insulting, but that sounds like someone that has been watching too many Star Trek movies. We can't even go to Mars yet because of radiation from cosmic rays. If a person can actually hope that humans will someday be able to travel to another universe without a deity, they have enough imagination to hope that Christ will one day return with thousands of angels and take us all to heaven.

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

You limited your criteria. Maybe the fact that there is no "sure thing" reveals that nobody knows.

That is exactly what it means. Nobody knows. I guess some could call me an agnostic that chooses to believe. I choose what I choose because it seems the most probable. It certainly seems more probable to me than life coming from non-life and everything coming from nothing.

The improbability is that it was created in 6 days.

If you are going to choose based on probabilities it makes no sense to simply choose the biblical narrative when there is far more probability that the universe evolved. Many evolutionists are still theists. Evolution is just as wondrous as process of creation. The difference is that life emerges in the universe when the conditions are right. It could just as easily indicate an intelligence behind the universe as a creation myth.

Many agnostics choose to be believers, though they generally don't choose a literal understanding because one can look at the probabilities of many of the claims of the bible and dismiss them.

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

Most Christians could not do the 12 steps. They would be too afraid. It requires a level of honesty and accountability most Christians are completely unaware of.

I think one could replace the word "Christians" with the word "people" and the above statement would be just as true. I once read in a publication that in an anonymous poll, only 15% of Adventists claimed to live what they profess to believe. Certainly most do not have the level of honesty required by the 12 Steps or by God for that matter. But neither does the population in general, so that is certainly not a unique trait of Christians.

You are right that you could replace the word "Christians" with the word "people." The difference is that Christians are going around claiming that their belief system makes them more enlightened than other people. I think that makes them a little higher on the hypocrisy scale.

[fccool]

Quote:

Actually the Pirahã don't have a word for spirit. The word spirit is used because Everett didn't know exactly what the word used by the Pirahã meant. He clearly states that the use of the word spirit is a cultural distortion for convenience.

The only cardinal rule the Pirahã have is don't tell anyone else what to do.

That may have more to do with their happiness than anything.

Bought his book last night, and I'm about half-way through it. He's very good writer, although I would like to know more about his personal Christian experience. Maybe it will surface as I read further.

I certainly like the honesty with which he describes things. I think other missionaries would have omitted and sterilized a couple things that would simply be natural expression of anger, fear, frustration and etc.

[Dr. Shane]

The difference is that Christians are going around claiming that their belief system makes them more enlightened than other people.

Clearly enlightenment does not translate into holiness. Many Christian paste a bumper sticker on their cars that reads "I am not perfect, just forgiven."

[Dr. Shane]

If you are going to choose based on probabilities it makes no sense to simply choose the biblical narrative when there is far more probability that the universe evolved.

Of course I don't consider science alone. I also look at the historical evidence which I do not dismiss as easily as many agnostics and atheists do. I find apologetics very compelling.

If one concludes that there is a high probability that the apostles were real people that taught they witnessed the resurrected Christ and in turn died a martyr's death for that belief, that is a game changer. (Of course that is a bigger "if" for some than others) If one concludes the New Testament accurately reflects history. A six-day creation event suddenly doesn't look all that unrealistic.

[Bravus]

I suspect some may be confusing 'other universes' with 'other solar systems' or 'other galaxies'.

Travel to the latter is just a matter of time and resources, albeit on an immense scale.

Travel to the former is physically impossible as far as anything we currently know or can imagine.

[SivartM]

I'm well aware of the difference, and I wouldn't expect to be able to travel between universes except by freak wardrobe accidents any time in the next million years. But maybe someday!

[Dr. Shane]

I suspect some may be confusing 'other universes' with 'other solar systems' or 'other galaxies'.

I understand the difference but for the sake of discussion, let's just say other galaxies. Even once we are able to overcome the issue of radiation from cosmic rays, our space ships do not travel at any speed close to the speed of light. Warping through space faster than the speed of light is pure fantasy at this point. So if we were to travel to a distant another galaxy at the current speed we are capable of, we would be talking about multiple generations to get there and we would have to be able to produce food on the space craft itself.

[Bravus]

Yep.