Does It Require More Faith [I] Not [I] To Believe In A Creator Than To Believe In One?

[Khandro]

The scientific, mathematical facts, seem to say so;

[Khandro]

v-e; As far as I know, proteins are amoral, therefore all moral values have been cooked up here on Earth.

[Old_Geezer]

Does It Require More Faith Not To Believe In The Spaghetti Monster Than To Believe In One ? How about Pink Unicorns ? Or anything else that one never sees or senses ?

[Old_Geezer]

Not interested in 13+ minutes of video, but high improbability has been used in the past to try to claim there must be a creator. The fact is at any particular point there may be a high improbability, but given the immense number of points in the universe the improbable becomes the absolutely certain somewhere. And if we are in a multiverse the certainty is infinitely more certain (if one can be more certain than certain). And here we are pondering it.

[naomi24]

Gizmonster, // Where does it say that Pascal's Wager involves fooling God??//

Anyone who makes a 'rational' decision that it could be beneficial to him to, as you say, // live as though God exists and seek to believe in God.// is not a genuine believer – and God, if he exists and is what he is reputed to be – will know that.

Theland, I’m still wondering who decided that Russia is mentioned in the Bible and how they reached that conclusion. Any idea? That aside, when are you expecting Egypt to be laid waste and the Nile to dry up?

Your video at 01:10 Tue. He is one boring speaker!

[Khandro]

OG; //....but given the immense number of points in the universe the improbable becomes the absolutely certain somewhere.//

This assertion isn't logical, and we're talking about proteins (real) not spaghetti monsters (fictional).

[Old_Geezer]

Nowt wrong with Pascal's Wager. Believe in all the Gods, even the small ones. One doesn't fake belief, one is supposed to cultivate it. Mind you, all the praising and worshipping might take a huge chunk of time out of your short life.

[Old_Geezer]

Who are you to say what is fictional and what not ?
The spaghetti monster will have taken note of your disbelief !

[Canary42]

/// This assertion isn't logical, ///

Unlike the original question ?

[jim360]

Just to be clear, an infinite Universe doesn't on its own rescue the situation -- that's not really how infinity works. What's needed is to recognise that protein arrangements are not random, and that there are other factors at play that make particular arrangements or sequences far more favourable than others.

[Old_Geezer]

But even if it didn't a sufficiently large universe would come up with a protein, which was the debated claim. May not be able to self-replicate, but a sufficiently large universe will come up with a lot more too, and has. And by the anthropic principle here we are anyway.

[jim360]

How large is large? Bear in mind, too, that we can't certainly claim to live in an infinite Universe. I've stressed that this is the most likely model to fit the observations of the shape of the Universe, but still: the Universe we can directly observe is finite. Indeed, it is in one sense surprisingly tiny. As a result, events whose probabilities are small enough still couldn't be expected to happen in the lifetime of our observable Universe, at any place.

Infinity doesn't rescue you from vanishingly small probabilities. Some other mechanism is needed. In that, at least, the video is essentially correct. Where the video fails is that it doesn't give any consideration at all to a natural mechanism: namely, that not all protein configurations are equally likely, and the driving force of that is thermodynamics alongside the Principle of Least Action.

[Old_Geezer]

The crunch there being one's considering the small portion of the universe that is observable to us. Plenty of universe observable to some other lifeforms (probably). And a return to the anthropic principle. We're here because it's suitable, and we came to be. I'd sincerely doubt that the universe is infinite, even if that is personal preference from the options, but in any case, it is large enough for space to appear flat to our measurements.

[Khandro]

jim; It's comforting to hear you postulate about the football being kicked through a brick wall - there is a theory there of its possibility, but we know from experience that the material world isn't like that, so it is "impossible".
I cant see why though, you can't go the extra mile and say that the overwhelming mathematics against the accidental formation of a protein and that protein to develop into the living word also accidentally, is as preposterous as your football analogy.

OG. You might as well say there is a London bus orbiting in galaxy XZ23 , I can't prove there isn't, but commonsense tells us it is nonsense.

[jim360]

I don't go the extra mile because the mechanism for a ball travelling through a wall is, in some sense, well-understood: it can occur via quantum tunnelling, allowing the probability to be calculated, at least roughly. The protein computation in the video above, though, is based on a poor understanding -- or, I may say, no understanding at all -- of the mechanisms that drive protein formations.

I will concede that to an extent I may have presented the problem as completely solved, which is certainly not true. But, implicit in the video's argument is that there is no reason why any one protein configuration is preferred over any other, and I think it is safe to say that this is utterly false. So, too, then, are any arguments that derive from it.

I can't do anything other than repeat the same point, then. The "overwhelming mathematics" against protein formation are based on a false premise, and therefore can't be taken seriously.

[vetuste_ennemi]

//Theland, I’m still wondering who decided that Russia is mentioned in the Bible and how they reached that conclusion//

Comes from Ezekiel 38 and 39 about a coalition of forces attacking Israel, Naomi:

"1 And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,
2 Son of man, set thy face against Gog, the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him,
3 And say, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal:
4 And I will turn thee back, and put hooks into thy jaws, and I will bring thee forth, and all thine army, horses and horsemen, all of them clothed with all sorts of armour, even a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords:
5 Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya with them; all of them with shield and helmet..."

"Prince" in verse 2 is the Hebrew word Rosh, get it? And you can see the references to Moscow and the ancient Russian capital Tobolsk in the Urals.

[vetuste_ennemi]

//v-e; As far as I know, proteins are amoral, therefore all moral values have been cooked up here on Earth//

I think they have, Khandro. A wonderful, extraordinary and, if you will, miraculous fact.

[vetuste_ennemi]

//jim; It's comforting to hear you postulate about the football being kicked through a brick wall - there is a theory there of its possibility, but we know from experience that the material world isn't like that, so it is "impossible"//

Al Khalili's series on quantum mechanics had a visual of plastic balls doing exactly that, Khandro. Tjhe quantum world appeas to contradict all our common sense intuition.s

No, I couldn't understand it - and I've watched the series three times now.

[Old_Geezer]

I think, Khandro, that, that sums up the same argument as those who dispute a creator.

[naomi24]

Thanks v_e. I know the verses well but the inference there has passed me by for all these years. All very Nostradamus.

[Khandro]

jim; // The protein computation in the video above, though, is based on a poor understanding -- or, I may say, no understanding at all -- of the mechanisms that drive protein formations. //

I'm not qualified to say if you are right or wrong in this, but I know people who are, at both the Universities of Munich and Tübingen, (dept.s of Mathematics and of biology) I will put it to them and see what they say.