From: Dawsonzhu@aol.com
Date: Wed Jul 09 2003 - 19:40:44 EDT
Richard A. McGough wrote:
> There is another aspect to consider. Atheists use the many-universes
> theory to defeat fine-tuning arguments. If every possible
> configuration is not merely possible but necessary, then there is no
> need to account for the fine-tuning of our universe that allows for
> life to exist.
and Iain Strachan wrote:
".....it seems to me that the MWI not only diminishes God, but
also science as well. One should take note how easily it sidesteps the
entire evolution/creation/ID debate. So what if natural selection isn't a
powerful enough process to design us? Mutations are (ultimately) down to
quantum events that have many possible outcomes. If we stick to one
universe, then the theories we have ought to be a model of the most probable
of all possible worlds. But if every single alternative universe exists
that arose from every single possible outcome of every quantum event that
ever occurred, then it doesn't matter if life is vanishingly unlikely to
have occurred. Because the right sequence of mutations must have occurred
in some universe for life to assemble itself without the aid of Natural
Selection. In one of the many sets of outcomes of quantum events, a complex
and highly specific protein for performing some useful function can
accumulate over a vast number of mutation events, without any gradual
advantage until the end. The "irreducibly complex" object can and will
assemble itself because all possible outcomes happen in some universe.
Therefore it might well have happened in ours because (anthropic principle),
we are here asking the question. So we don't need to evoke Natural
Selection as the designer; we could simply appeal to the
Many-Worlds-Interpretation-Of-The-Gaps."
My observation:
Both of you seem to be getting yourselves locked into this emotionally.
First, always keep at the front of your mind that we (as Christians) want
to know the truth, because the truth sets us free. We become like
Creation science advocates and bad peer reviews when we allow our
emotions and political opinions to cloud and bias our judgment.
Rather than paint the ideas as mere atheist propaganda, try to
listen to what is being said, test it with your best understanding,
and decide if you agree with it based on the best information
you have. That is what we are asked to do a scientists.
Although none of us can be sure about the truth, we should
at least be sure that we are not ultimately ignoring things
that are true because of our emotions and opinions. Who knows,
the ultimate irony of it all might be that it give you more confidence
that God exists.
By Grace alone we proceed,
Wayne
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Jul 09 2003 - 19:41:03 EDT