The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Could the universe have been an act of an intelligent designer /chance  (Read 42740 times)

Offline BenV

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1503
    • View Profile
HERE ARE A FEW MORE FACTORS THAT SUGGEST THAT THE UNIVERSE WAS DESIGNED


The mass and size of this planet are just right. If it was 10% larger or smaller, life would not be possible upon this planet. It is just the right distance from the sun for heat and cold. Farther and we would freeze, closer and we would be baked.

Consider the tilt of the axis of the earth. No other planet has our 23 degree tilt.

This enables all parts of the surface to have sun light. Without this, the poles would build up enormous ice and the equator would become intensely hot.


Consider the moon. Without the tides created by the moon, all our harbors and shores would become one stench pool of garbage.

The tides and waves based upon the moon's movement and gravitational pull aerate the oceans and provide oxygen for the plankton, which is the very foundation of the food chain of our world.

Without plankton, there would not be oxygen and man would not be able to live on the earth. The moon is the right size and the right distance from the earth.

Reduced

Again, you're looking at it from the wrong perspective - it's not "these things happened/exist so that we can exist", but these things happened/exist and so we exist - the final outcome is not the reason for the history, it's the consequence thereof.  It's good that these conditions exist, as that has led to our evolution and our ability to discuss it here and now, but there is no reason to think that it happened in order for us to exist.  Basically, you're saying that humans exist and so the universe must have been designed - this doesn't make sense.
 

Offline latebind

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 248
  • Hello World
    • View Profile
I agree with BenV

One thing to consider is that there are trillions of stars in the universe. The odd's of a planet being in the so called "goldilocks" zone is very low, but when compared with the amount of stars it is probably not such a coincedence.
 

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1285
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
BenV

Quote
Again, you're looking at it from the wrong perspective - it's not "these things happened/exist so that we can exist", but these things happened/exist and so we exist - the final outcome is not the reason for the history, it's the consequence thereof.  It's good that these conditions exist, as that has led to our evolution and our ability to discuss it here and now, but there is no reason to think that it happened in order for us to exist.  Basically, you're saying that humans exist and so the universe must have been designed - this doesn't make sense.

But Ben why must we dismiss the alternative possibility? - why could the universe our world etc etc not have have the forthought of a great intellect ID if you like, who created the correct conditions so that life could evolve.

Maybe the small changes we see in the tiny progressive evololusionary advantageous mutations, might be just nudges by this ID. Maybe it is experimenting with us, looking down on its equivalent of a petre dish.  
 

Offline BenV

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1503
    • View Profile
I don't know if the universe was created by an intelligent designer, but there are lots of things that we do not know, and I do not feel that postulating a designer to explain things we can't explain is useful.  I do not assume the existence of any such being, and so this explanation would, in fact, create more questions for me than it answers.  So I choose to accept that the universe was almost certainly not created by an intelligent designer, and resign myself to the fact that I may never know the details of the origin of the universe.

We can consider any and every alternative, but where does that get us?  The idea of an intelligent designer is as logical as the idea that the universe was the result of a giant sneeze from the Great Green Arkleseizure, but I don't see you arguing that this could also be true.

The reason to dismiss an intelligent designer is that there is no evidence, no falsifiable way of testing it, it's based on illogical assumptions and creates more questions than it answers.

Maybe the small changes we see in the tiny progressive evololusionary advantageous mutations, might be just nudges by this ID. Maybe it is experimenting with us, looking down on its equivalent of a petre dish.   

Maybe they're the result of the great spaghetti monster, or maybe we're in a matrix-like simulation - maybe we're being experimented upon by pan-dimensional beings that appear in the form of mice, maybe we're all just part of your imagination, maybe we're the dreams of trees...

There are so very many unprovable, untestable maybes - do you think they should all have equal standing?
 

Offline Don_1

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6890
  • Thanked: 7 times
  • A stupid comment for every occasion.
    • View Profile
    • Knight Light Haulage
If I were the ID who created this planet (and the rest of the universe) I think I would have put right all bits that I got wrong by now.

For example, I created this piece of beauty


Yet I also created this piece of beauty


One will eat the other. What point is there in that, from a creators point of view? Would it not be better to have a stable population of all animals and plants etc. and let them all feed on minerals?

What is the point of creating volcanos, they just mess up my creation. Our planet could be described as more of an experiment than a creation, so why doesn't the Intelligent Scientist pop in to view the results of the experiment once in while. Or are we a petri dish he forgot about?
 

Offline echochartruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 395
    • View Profile
Quote
If a stem cell knows what to do it's because of it's genetic programming - it doesn't know anything - it's just a machine.

so you are extending that stem cells are not only intelligent and engineered but also programed and they do all this themselves? clever little cells, sorry machine.
Do you think it correct to call stem cells a machine?
How many of these machines do we each have in our bodies.
If you are correct in calling them machines it might be easier for others to accept that the universe was made by a mechine and therfore your comment ads to my "Intelligent design Theory".
As I mentioned science likes to humanise a 'creator/designer' in the theory of "intelligent deign" so I suppose whether it is god and alien or a machine it does just that.

Has the big bang theory been tested?
Has the theory of bacteria developing into another species that then turns into yet another species been tested?

I'm not a scientist but I would love to read about such tests.

« Last Edit: 11/03/2009 18:43:47 by echochartruse »
 

Offline echochartruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 395
    • View Profile
If I were the ID who created this planet (and the rest of the universe) I think I would have put right all bits that I got wrong by now.

For example, I created this piece of beauty


Yet I also created this piece of beauty


One will eat the other. What point is there in that, from a creators point of view? Would it not be better to have a stable population of all animals and plants etc. and let them all feed on minerals?

What is the point of creating volcanos, they just mess up my creation. Our planet could be described as more of an experiment than a creation, so why doesn't the Intelligent Scientist pop in to view the results of the experiment once in while. Or are we a petri dish he forgot about?

Some people cant see the beauty and process of renewable sustainability of our  planet. They wish it to be static
 

Offline echochartruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 395
    • View Profile
Again it is difficult for some to take out the "human GOD factor" of intelligent design.

Open your mind and think of intelligent design as maybe one of those little machines that programes itself and has intelligently engineered itself to develop into whatever it wants to be, I'm talking about a stem cell of course.

Maye there is somethig more to the stem cell something we have not discovered yet?

Take out the human factor, the god favtor or what ever blocks your mind to make it think that this wonderful place, just happened.
« Last Edit: 11/03/2009 19:12:50 by echochartruse »
 

Offline echochartruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 395
    • View Profile
Quote
If a stem cell knows what to do it's because of it's genetic programming - it doesn't know anything - it's just a machine.

Ben V - Please tell me the person, god or other who programmed the stem cell. Is your statement above fact or theory? I dont mean to be rude I am just interested in learning.
 

Offline latebind

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 248
  • Hello World
    • View Profile
Humans create everything they need, that doesn't already exist. This makes us very bad candidates to ponder the idea of creation. We naturally will wonder who 'created' us and the world we live in, but perhaps it was not an act of creation, it might be something so complex and so out of our range that it is simply incomprehensible to us.

In my opinion we simply dont have the capacity to enquire about creation of the universe.
 

Offline echochartruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 395
    • View Profile
I agree, our existence is more than we can comprehend.

So therefore I think that we should not block the thoughts and suggestions that may lead to a better understanding.
I believe that beside "the big bang theory" we should include "intelligent design" keeping human/god/alien and machine out of it. We all need to look much deeper.

But what i am sure of is this wonderful universe being so well coordinated and self sustainable, didn't 'just happen' and until science can say without any doubt how it did happen then our own inability to test the point where our universe came into existence and establish yet another theory, should not be hindered by some trying to bring religion or other mind blocking, prejudice thoughts into the argument.
 

Offline BenV

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1503
    • View Profile
Quote
If a stem cell knows what to do it's because of it's genetic programming - it doesn't know anything - it's just a machine.

so you are extending that stem cells are not only intelligent and engineered but also programed and they do all this themselves? clever little cells, sorry machine.
Do you think it correct to call stem cells a machine?
How many of these machines do we each have in our bodies.
If you are correct in calling them machines it might be easier for others to accept that the universe was made by a mechine and therfore your comment ads to my "Intelligent design Theory".
Nope - I'm not saying they are intelligent.
Nope - I'm not saying they are engineered - they have arrived through evolution.
Yes, I think it's reasonable to call them a machine.
Nope, it adds nothing to your 'intelligent design hypothesis'.

Quote
As I mentioned science likes to humanise a 'creator/designer' in the theory of "intelligent deign" so I suppose whether it is god and alien or a machine it does just that.

Has the big bang theory been tested?

Not directly, in as much as that is impossible - however, the theory of the big bang makes predictions based on existing observations that have since been shown to be true.  It may yet be wrong, but right now it's our best model.

Quote
Has the theory of bacteria developing into another species that then turns into yet another species been tested?

I'm not a scientist but I would love to read about such tests.
Well, we have seen bacteria evolving new characteristics (characteristics that take the strain away from the defining characteristics of the existing species of bacteria), all in a lab under little selection pressure.  The theory of evolution also, again, makes predictions that have since been shown to be true.  It's our best explanation of the diversity of life on Earth.


Again it is difficult for some to take out the "human GOD factor" of intelligent design.

Open your mind and think of intelligent design as maybe one of those little machines that programes itself and has intelligently engineered itself to develop into whatever it wants to be, I'm talking about a stem cell of course.

Maye there is somethig more to the stem cell something we have not discovered yet?
I haven't mentioned god, and as a scientist my mind is very open to possibilities, thanks.  Stem cells become different types of cell under different conditions - the external environment contributes to experssion of different genes, which have evolved over time.  There may be more to learn about stem cells, in fact I strongly suspect there is.  I don't need there to be any intelligence behind them, but if evidence comes to light that there is, then fair enough.

Quote
Take out the human factor, the god favtor or what ever blocks your mind to make it think that this wonderful place, just happened.
Thinking as objectively as any person is capable of, I would have to assume that this wonderful place is the result of a series of rather wonderful coincidences.

Ben V - Please tell me the person, god or other who programmed the stem cell. Is your statement above fact or theory? I dont mean to be rude I am just interested in learning.
Stem cells are under genetic control, as are all the other cells in the body.  These genes have been shaped by a process of natural selection.  No person, no god, no 'programming'.  Just natural selection of natural gene variation.

I agree, our existence is more than we can comprehend.

So therefore I think that we should not block the thoughts and suggestions that may lead to a better understanding.
I believe that beside "the big bang theory" we should include "intelligent design" keeping human/god/alien and machine out of it. We all need to look much deeper.

But what i am sure of is this wonderful universe being so well coordinated and self sustainable, didn't 'just happen' and until science can say without any doubt how it did happen then our own inability to test the point where our universe came into existence and establish yet another theory, should not be hindered by some trying to bring religion or other mind blocking, prejudice thoughts into the argument.

In essence, I agree.  I agree that religion has no place in science, and I agree that the origin of the universe is a very difficult question to answer, and we may never arrive at a solution.  But why have you closed your mind to the idea that it did 'just happen'?  Instead of opening your mind to the full possibility that we may never know, you have decided that there is something more behind it.
 

lyner

  • Guest
But if a DESIGNER designed us, then who designed the DESIGNER?
And, if you say the DESIGNER was always there, why couldn't the 'system' have always been there? (I am assuming the System is 'outside' and contains the Universe.

I realise that Logic may not actually apply here (either in the minds of IDists or in the actual system, which may not be logical) but there is no Logic which forces the choice of having an ID.
 

Offline echochartruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 395
    • View Profile
Quote
Nope - I'm not saying they are intelligent.
no you didn't a scientist working with stem cells did
Quote
Nope - I'm not saying they are engineered -
no you didn't a scientist working with stem cells did
Quote
Yes, I think it's reasonable to call them a machine.
on what authority
A machine that is genetically engineered to change itself! Wow.


Quote
has the big bang been tested?
I asked
Quote
Not directly, in as much as that is impossible - however, the theory of the big bang makes predictions based on existing observations that have since been shown to be true.  It may yet be wrong, but right now it's our best model.
theories based on predictions, hmm.
You told me here that a theory had to be able to be tested!!!! now you are changing your mind.
Is the 'Big Bang a theory or not?


Quote
Well, we have seen bacteria evolving new characteristics (characteristics that take the strain away from the defining characteristics of the existing species of bacteria), all in a lab under little selection pressure.  The theory of evolution also, again, makes predictions that have since been shown to be true.  It's our best explanation of the diversity of life on Earth.
Are you saying that one species can evolve into another?

When I go to New Zealand I begin to talk like them too. When I go to the beach I come home with a tan..........when I have the flu I develop antibodies....... forever changing, adapting or as you put it evolving, not back to an ape I hope.

I read in a science journal that humans have 89% same genetic make up as plants

Quote
In essence, I agree.  I agree that religion has no place in science, and I agree that the origin of the universe is a very difficult question to answer, and we may never arrive at a solution.
so if the big bang cant be tested and it is a theory and stem cells are intelligent, engineered and a machine and can alter their appearance to create a new. Maybe intelligent, engineered design should be a valid option as it is already proven with stem cell research
 

lyner

  • Guest
Quote

Quote
Nope - I'm not saying they are intelligent.
no you didn't a scientist working with stem cells did
Quote
Nope - I'm not saying they are engineered -
no you didn't a scientist working with stem cells did

Wow. An actual SCIENTIST said it! That's the ultimate authority.

The Big Bang can be called a theory because there is testable evidence for it. Evolution can be seen to happen - it happens when conditions are changed artificially - which speeds it up. There is fossil and other evidence of similar changes. These are also 'tests' which means that Evolution also has the status of a theory.

In what way can the ID idea be tested? Yes- it's an attractive idea. What else?
 

Offline BenV

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1503
    • View Profile
Quote
Nope - I'm not saying they are intelligent.
no you didn't a scientist working with stem cells did
Quote
Nope - I'm not saying they are engineered -
no you didn't a scientist working with stem cells did
Quote
Yes, I think it's reasonable to call them a machine.
on what authority
A machine that is genetically engineered to change itself! Wow.
Oh dear - firstly - I was responding to your comment of "so you are extending that stem cells are not only intelligent and engineered but also programed and they do all this themselves?".  Secondly, please tell us who this scientist is, as I think you may have entirely misinterpreted what he meant.

How would you define a machine?  I wasn't stating with any authority that stem cells are machines, but I think it's reasonable - all cells are biological machines.  Maybe it would be easier to comprehend if I were to say that the components within a cell are machines - they consume energy and perform tasks, such as copying DNA, building proteins etc.

Quote
Quote
has the big bang been tested?
I asked
Quote
Not directly, in as much as that is impossible - however, the theory of the big bang makes predictions based on existing observations that have since been shown to be true.  It may yet be wrong, but right now it's our best model.
theories based on predictions, hmm.
You told me here that a theory had to be able to be tested!!!! now you are changing your mind.
Is the 'Big Bang a theory or not?
"Theories based on predictions"? - No.  No one said that but you.  A theory from which one can make predictions.  So yes, the theory has been tested.

Quote
Quote
Well, we have seen bacteria evolving new characteristics (characteristics that take the strain away from the defining characteristics of the existing species of bacteria), all in a lab under little selection pressure.  The theory of evolution also, again, makes predictions that have since been shown to be true.  It's our best explanation of the diversity of life on Earth.
Are you saying that one species can evolve into another?

When I go to New Zealand I begin to talk like them too. When I go to the beach I come home with a tan..........when I have the flu I develop antibodies....... forever changing, adapting or as you put it evolving, not back to an ape I hope.
Yes, one species can evolve into another, new species.  Should the genetic or morphological differences become so great that the new stock can no longer interbreed with the original stock, it will be defined as a new species.  Do you understand the process of evolution?

Quote
I read in a science journal that humans have 89% same genetic make up as plants
That figure sounds too high to me.  Besides, there's a world of difference between sharing genes and having identical genes.  We do share around half our genes with plants, but there can be large differences within those genes.  What point were you trying to make with this?  We share genes with every living species, as far as I know.
Quote
Quote
In essence, I agree.  I agree that religion has no place in science, and I agree that the origin of the universe is a very difficult question to answer, and we may never arrive at a solution.
so if the big bang cant be tested and it is a theory and stem cells are intelligent, engineered and a machine and can alter their appearance to create a new.
Nope, I don't think you've been reading my posts at all.

The big bang theory has been tested.

Stem cells are not intelligent.

Stem cells are not engineered, but arrived by evolution.

Stem cells cannot alter their appearance.  As I stated before, external factors affect gene expression, which leads to the cells producing other types of cell.

Quote
Maybe intelligent, engineered design should be a valid option as it is already proven with stem cell research
No it hasn't, and it wouldn't be a valid hypothesis as it's based on unfalsifiable, poor assumptions about intelligence and design.

Please actually read the comments you reply to - you clearly didn't take in anything that I had said.
« Last Edit: 12/03/2009 00:07:43 by BenV »
 

Offline Madidus_Scientia

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
What BenV said.

And stem cells don't design themselves, which is what you seem to be thinking echochartruse. They just express different genes based on their environment. Dynamic, not intelligent.

It seems to me that 99% of the opponents of the theory of evolution don't actually properly grasp how it works, or anything about the biology behind it.
 

Offline echochartruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 395
    • View Profile
"differnet genes based on the environment" but that is what eveolution is,,,,,
but stem cell scientist said they are intelligent and engineered to develop.........so could evolution be based on intelligent engineering?
 

Offline _Stefan_

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 814
    • View Profile
    • My Photobucket Album
You must have misunderstood him. Please show us the name of the scientist and/or the article you read that in.
 

Offline BenV

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1503
    • View Profile
"differnet genes based on the environment" but that is what eveolution is,,,,,
Not quite in this context.  With stem cells, all the genes are there, and there are external factors which control which ones will be switched on/off.

Quote
but stem cell scientist said they are intelligent and engineered to develop.........so could evolution be based on intelligent engineering?
We really need to know who it was and what he said, as you may have misunderstood him, he may have been taken out of context, or he may have just poorly communicated what he meant.  Stem cells are not thought of as intelligent, and they are not engineered, but arrived at by evolution.  So no, evolution is not based on intelligent engineering.

Please find us a link to this person so we can see what he was saying/really meant.
 

Offline echochartruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 395
    • View Profile
Quote

Quote
Nope - I'm not saying they are intelligent.
no you didn't a scientist working with stem cells did
Quote
Nope - I'm not saying they are engineered -
no you didn't a scientist working with stem cells did

Quote
Wow. An actual SCIENTIST said it! That's the ultimate authority.
Stephen Badylak was the person

Can someone tell me about him?

 

Offline echochartruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 395
    • View Profile
Quote
and they are not engineered, but arrived at by evolution. 

you do mean the 'theory' of Evolution dont you? I wouldn't want to think that people dont say what they mean.

 

Offline Flyberius

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 60
    • View Profile
I read a very good book today (long haul flight from canada) called "13 things that dont make sense".  One topic was life and the other was death.  Very very deep and clever stuff.  Another topic raised was the constants of the universe.

I can't begin to explain the ideas and counter ideas put forward but needless to say it kept me occupied and now my brain hurts.  Chances are as more infomation comes to light about the formation of these constants (or possibly just the one) we will understand why this all neatly fits in.

I like the idea that if things weren't so perfect there would be nothing to observe it and therefore it wouldn't technically exist.  It reminds me of quantum mechanics.  Perhaps the universe, our quantum branch anyway, settled on these friendly constants because it's the only possible way it could exist and be observed.  Any extreme combinations wouldn't result in anythin able to contemplate its crappyness and it would simply be a froth of possibilities.
« Last Edit: 12/03/2009 10:59:21 by Flyberius »
 

Offline echochartruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 395
    • View Profile
Quote
We really need to know who it was and what he said, as you may have misunderstood him, he may have been taken out of context, or he may have just poorly communicated what he meant.  Stem cells are not thought of as intelligent, and they are not engineered, but arrived at by evolution.  So no, evolution is not based on intelligent engineering.
"intelligent cells," Dr. Frauscher said. "Not only do they stay where they are injected, but also they quickly form new muscle tissue and when the muscle mass reaches the appropriate size, the cell growth ceases automatically."

Please find us a link to this person so we can see what he was saying/really meant.
[/quote]
 

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1285
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Flybys


Quote
I like the idea that if things weren't so perfect there would be nothing to observe it and therefore it wouldn't technically exist.  It reminds me of quantum mechanics.  Perhaps the universe, our quantum branch anyway, settled on these friendly constants because it's the only possible way it could exist and be observed.  Any extreme combinations wouldn't result in anythin able to contemplate its creepiness and it would simply be a froth of possibilities.

Would the universe exist if there were no one observing it?

Quantum physics make no sense and appears to be illogical. But we use it nevertheless by relying on probability

Down there the ID seems to have gone a little crasy

Alan


 

The Naked Scientists Forum


 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
 
Login
Login with username, password and session length