Is there actual scientific proof that disproves a god?

Question

In the past thirty five years, scientists have been stunned to discover that the universe is finely tuned to an incomprehensible precision to support life. For many scientist, this points in a very compelling way toward the existence of an Intelligent Designer. Here are some of the data gathered by scientists, both Christians and non-Christians, that point toward complexity and orderedness at the beginning of the universe: Stephen Hawkins has calculated that if the rate of the universe's expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, the universe would have collapsed into a fireball. British physicist P.C.W. Davies has concluded that the odds against the initial conditions being suitable for the formation of stars, which are necessary for planets and thus life, is a one followed by at least a thousand billion billion zeros. Davies also estimated that if the strength of gravity were changed by only one part in 10^100, life could never have developed. For comparison, there are only 10^80 atoms in the entire known universe. There are about fifty constants and quantities. For example, the amount of usable energy in the universe, the difference in mass between protons and neutrons, the proportion of matter to antimatter. That must be balanced to a mathematically infinitesimal degree for any life to be possible. For organic life to exist, the fundamental regularities and constants of physics must all have values that together fall into an extremely narrow range.

The probability of this perfect calibration happening by chance is so tiny as to be statistically negligible. Collins puts it well: "When you look from the perspective of a scientist at the universe, it looks as if it knew we were coming. There are fifteen constants...that have precise values. If any of those constants was off by even one part in a million, or in some cases, by one part in a million million, the universe could not have been able to coalesce, there would have been no galaxy, stars, planets or people." Some have said that it is as if there were a large number of dials that all had to be tuned to within extremely narrow limits, and they were. It seem extremely unlikely that this would happen by chance. Stephen Hawkins concludes: "The odds against the Big Bang are enormous. I think there are clearly religious implications." Elsewhere he says, "It would be very difficult to explain why the universe would have begun in just this way except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us."

Astronomers are discovering a whole new dimension of evidence that suggests this astounding world was created, in part, so we could have the adventure of exploring it. As astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez and science philosopher Jay Wesley Richards, who wrote the book "The Privileged Planet," elaborates. Total eclipse of the sun, which yield a treasure trove of scientific data, can only be viewed from one place in the solar system where there are intelligent beings to view them. Also, earth's location away from galaxy's center and in the flat plane of the disk provides a particularly privileged vantage point for observing both nearby and distant stars. Another example, earth provides an excellent position to detect the cosmic background radiation, which is critically important because it contains invaluable information about the properties of the universe when it was very young. Because our moon is the right size and distance to stabilize Earth's tilt, it helps preserve the deep snow deposits in our polar regions, from which scientist can determine the history of snowfall, temperatures, winds, and the amount of volcanic dust, methane, and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The findings of scientists that our world appears to be designed for discovery have added a compelling new dimension to the evidence for a Creator. And, frankly, their analysis makes sense. The finely tuned universe can compel only one reasonable conclusion, a supernatural agent must be responsible for it.

Every time I've come across written communication, whether it's a painting on a cave wall or a novel from Amazon.com or the words "I love you" inscribed in the sand on the beach, there has always been someone who did the writing. Even if I can't see the couple who wrote "I love you," you don't assume that the words randomly appeared by chance of the the movement of the waves. Someone of intelligence made that written communication. And what is encoded on the DNA inside every cell of every living creature is purely and simply written information. I'm not saying this because I'm a writer; scientist will tell you this. We use a twenty-six-letter chemical alphabet, whose letters combine in various sequences to form all the instructions needed to guide the functioning of the cell.

Old Bookworm · Accepted Answer

If you're going to copy/paste lengthy extracts from Lee Strobel's "Case for Faith", it might be nice to acknowledge him as the author.

? · Answer

The scientific method does not allow the use of supernatural explanations. Therefore, God's existence is not a valid scientific question and "creation science" is, by definition, an oxymoron.

>>Stephen Hawkins concludes: "The odds against the Big Bang are enormous. I think there are clearly religious implications." Elsewhere he says, "It would be very difficult to explain why the universe would have begun in just this way except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us."<<

Nice - and typical - example of Christian intellectual dishonesty and intellectual laziness.

Hawkins is not talking about his own beliefs. These quotes come from a discussion about the anthropic principle.

Your other "evidence" is equally lame, but to cut to the chase: regardless of any calculated "odds", they are no worse than the odds that a supernatural being is responsible.

The truth is that you are a scientifically illiterate nitwit who does not understand a single word of of what you have copied and pasted.

When did lying and stupidity become core Christian values?

======

imcatholic2 --

>>Newton's Third Law of Motion states "For every action there is equal and opposite reaction." Every action in the universe was caused by a prior equal and opposite reaction.<<

That proves there is no God in our physical universe, you idiot. It means if there was a God, there would be physical evidence and he could hunt him down and kick the Holy Snot out of the SOB.

Anonymous · Answer

That's a selective viewing of the evidence. I mean there are a lot of chaotic events that are inimical to life- blackholes sucking up star systems, stars colliding, stars exploding, galaxies crashing into each other to name a few. Also, most of what we've seen of the universe, so far, is hostile to life , take our own planetary system. Yet you're there carrying on about order.

Also, scientists postulate an infinite number of universes - with evidence from successful theories like quantum mechanics. - and our universe is one which happens to have laws suitable to life. This undermines your notions.

Even if we were the only universe, so you're saying that the fantastic odds mean that it can't happen. Well, that's not true, all you really can say is that what has happened had a low probability but it happened. It's like walking along the beach and randomly picking up some grain of sand and screaming , "Oh wow, to have  picked up this particular grain out of all the billions that I could have chosen must mean some unknown power was guiding me, it's too impossible to believe otherwise. You know that's bullshit and so is your case about a finely tuned universe.

krazychemist78 · Answer

Holy God, this is a bunch of douchebaggery. I think it's a huge leap forward that Christians are starting to acknowledge evolution by adapting the "Intelligent Design" compromise. Eventually they'll also learn logic. For one: the total eclipse of the sun is caused by the moon coming between the Earth and sun. This can happen on any planet with moons. The argument that the astronomically small odds of life occurring point to a divine creator also is without merit. For example, we would probably consider the chance that 1 in 1 million people will be born with flippers to be pretty small. But that means we would have nearly 400 people in the US with flippers, enough to fill 10 school buses. The universe is practically infinite in size - the small odds would have ample sample volume to occur, evidenced by our existence. By your last argument EVPs are actually messages from the dead instead of our brain finding connections and meaning in random noise - much like how religions try to prove the existence of a divine being. Copypaste Fail.

Anonymous · Answer

Nice cut & paste. Shame you never read it or you would have realised what a load of bollocks it was.

Did you know that googling "In the past thirty five years, scientists have been stunned to discover that the universe is finely tuned to an incomprehensible precision to support life" returns 468 results. 468 people who quite coincidentally decided to use that exact same phrase.

? · Answer

You say, "how can such a complex universe be made by chance?"
I answer, "its not made by chance, we just simply don't know the answer yet"

200 years ago people were making the same argument you were but with Lightning and Rainbows instead.

Athiests unlike Christians dont claim to know the origin of existence

Anonymous · Answer

The lifeforms that exist now are not special. They just happened to be the ones that survived. Before you make any appeals at all to our universe being fine-tuned, you have to justify exactly why fine-tuning the universe to support human life is an objectively favorable proposition as opposed to designing it for the existence of any other possible thing. Before that, it's all nonsense.

? · Answer

Copy & paste (thanks, Google).  I'm not impressed.

The "Argument from Ignorance" is just: "I don't know how this happened, so my god must have done it."

There's no reliable evidence for God/Yahweh, Jesus, Allah, Zeus, Odin, Quetzlcoatl, Vishnu, Thor, Shiva, or any of the thousands of other gods that people have worshiped.  If any of the major gods existed, there would be reliable evidence.  Since no such evidence exists, these gods do not exist.  There's also extensive evidence that they are all just myths, created to help soothe our fear of death, and perpetuated through religion to subjugate the underclass into obedience.

Nakkiel · Answer

You can"disprove" claims of contact with a god and all that.. but not an invisible being that leaves no visible traces other than human made books and word of mouth and lives in a place we can't experience in any way without permanently dying.

Then again you can't really prove or disprove anything.. We could all be living in the matrix right now. 




/bendspoon

imacatholic2 · Answer

Quite the opposite.

Modern Astrophysics has proven the existence of God beyond a reasonable doubt.

Newton's Third Law of Motion states "For every action there is equal and opposite reaction."  Every action in the universe was caused by a prior equal and opposite reaction.

If we logically follow each and every action and reaction back to the beginning then logically there has to be a first action without a prior equal and opposite reaction. Modern astrophysicists call this event the Big Bang.

This first action was completely independent of outside forces. This action was God, the un-caused cause, creating the universe. This proof also fulfills the principle of Occam's Razor.

By the way, it was Georges Lemaître (1894–1966), a Belgian Catholic priest and professor of physics and astronomy, who proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre

===

Another proof:

A universe in which life has a chance to exist can only happen in where a couple of dozen universal constants coincide, including:
+ Minimum interval of space
+ Minimum unit of time
+ Planck's Constant
+ Maximum velocity
+ Gravitational Attraction Constant
+ Weak Force Coupling Constant
+ Strong Nuclear Force Coupling Constant
+ Rest Mass of a Proton
+ Rest Mass of an Electron
+ Electron or Proton Unit Charge
+ Minimum Mass of the Universe
+ Total Visible Rest Mass
+ Boltzmann's Constant
+ Hubble Constant
+ Cosmological Constant
+ Cosmic Proton/Photon Ratio
+ Permittivity of Free Space
+ Electromagnetic Fine-Structure Constant
+ Weak Fine-Structure Constant
+ Gravitational Fine-Structure Constant

A couple of percent difference in any one of these constants would make the universe completely uninhabitable. Roger Penrose, a peer of Hawking, calculated that the chance of a universe capable of supporting life as we know it as one part in 10 raised to the power of 10 raised to the power of 123. 

This fine tuning of the universe, while not an absolute proof of God, can be used to help prove the existence of God beyond a reasonable doubt (which is my claim).

====

For credible scientific and factually reliable evidence for the existance of God see the Magi's God Wiki: "Why Believe in God?" http://magisgodwiki.org/index.php/Why_Believe_in_God%3F

I also suggest you read Robert Spitzer's book "New Proofs for the Existence of God: Contributions of Contemporary Physics and Philosophy" 

With love in Christ.

Squeaky Red Bottom · Answer

Yes, there is.
Obviously, everything you've seen so far hasn't convinced you, so you just *tell* me what it would take to convince you 100% that your god doesn't exist, and I will provide you with exactly that?

I'll wait...

Edit: by the way, the probability of any event occurring that has already occurred is 100%. Duh.
I don't think you thought about that one before you asked it.

Edit 2: I'm still waiting....
Don't you want your proof?

Trending News

Is there actual scientific proof that disproves a god?

22 Answers