Up til now, the evidence I presented can be contradicted by atheists as a series of lucky breaks, no matter how unlikely.But now I think I have found direct evidence of Intelligent Design.
In the last chapter we covered how the first elements ,hydrogen and helium, which are created in the belly of the first stars that formed from dust and gases, with the help of gravity.The heavier elements such as:carbon,nitrogen,oxygen,silicon,iron and many others are created from the tremendous heat and energy of a supernova.These are stars that blow up in cosmic explosions sending dust, gases made of hydrogen and helium across the universe.This stuff congregates with stuff from other supernovas forming new stars and now the heavier elements are formed. These elements formed the earth and us.In essence we are made of star stuff.
What a beautiful system and that evidence by itself could point to design.But it really gets weird when we look inside the world of atoms that are the building blocks of the elements ,which are the building blocks of everything we see and touch.It is the quantum world.
The quantum or atomic world has different laws that govern them. For example, sub-atomic particles can appear in Two different places at the same time.Scientific observations have shown that sub-atomic particles can go from one spot to another, without crossing the intervening space. In the realm of quantum physics, just observing something actually influences the physical process taking place.
What's going on here? Is this some kind of magic?This is real, I have left links to show I am not making this up. The atomic world is meta-physical. The physical laws of Newton and Einstein do not apply here.
Where is the smoking gun?The quantum world is the foundation of our world.Could some of these meta-physical properties seep into our Newtonian world.How could this wild ,magic world be our foundation, without some intelligence controlling it?
What is quantum Physics
How did the elements form
Below is a comment from another board.
ReplyDeleteThe main problem with intelligent design is that it does not provide any hypothesis or theory that is falsifiable. Here are the consequences of this fatal flaw.
It leads to two dead ends, one at the beginning of the discussion, and one at the end. Typically the middle is gobbledeygook crap anyways, so let's not bother with that. So to begin with, creationists start with an apriori assumption (i.e. the God that I understand based on my faith, exists) which obliterates the principle of scientific inquiry as a disinterested observer right from the get go. Second, at the end of any reasonably coherent paper I've ever read that promotes intelligent design (I'm using coherent loosely here), the bottom line is "wtf, this is way too complicated, we give up, we'll never understand this any further so there must be a God." Classic circular logic, setting out to prove what you assume to begin with. And ultimately sterile and ineffective as a way of understanding nature, since there is no other model to use as a framework for understanding nature except religious dogma. And we all know how successful that's been over the centuries. Galileo anyone?
The so-called Godless atheism that infuriates so many religious people when they discuss evolution has nothing to do with scientists wanting to do away with God in the realm of matters other than science (faith belief etc...), but it was pointed out long ago that rational explanations for how nature works do not require assuming the intervention of some omniscient and omnipotent force. In other words, coherent explanations only occur when a scientist makes no presumption at all about knowing or understanding how "God" thinks or works and (this is the part that really gets the creationists) they simply remove God from the equation to begin with and go about their business. There are way too many people around who presume to have intimate and accurate information about how God works, thinks, acts or whatever, and this is not only arrogant to the extreme, it is not useful for understanding nature.
The strange thing is, I do believe in God and I am a scientist. But to me, creationists and intelligent design fiends pervert both the wonder of faith and the beauty of science.
I don't know what the above person is reffering to, but just because scientist don't consider divine intervention why cannot a non scientist. I have taken actual scientific facts and theories and have shown that scientist make up theories with no more evidence,such as string theory and multi-universe,than I do when considering divine intervention in the creation of the world and life.
ReplyDelete