"...you believe someone made this table... have you seen the maker..." I do believe someone made the table, and I presume a _human_ someone, not aliens or pixies. "...why do you believe someone made this table..." Well, you see I'm familiar with the constituent components the table is made out of, including wood, metal, and so on. I have knowledge of how these things typically exist in nature, and how they move about generally, especially in large clumps such as we see here. And as part of that I notice a distinct lack of any process that they undergo normally that leads to table-like shapes. As a result, I conclude that something external happened to the different pieces to result in them looking so very unnatural. I can do the _exact same thing_ with a bird's nest, or even an ant's burrow. By noticing how the building materials (twigs and leaves for the next, dirt for the ants) behaves on its own, I can easily work out that it has some sort of maker. Now this maker doesn't need language, or even thought, to do it, perhaps not even what we would call 'intelligence'. It simply has to function in a way that leads to it building this stuff out of other stuff. You can then ask if that thing that built it was, itself, the result of intelligence or not, but it turns out that 'not' is the correct answer. Living things are not, apparently, the result of intelligence. "...what do you need to create a universe..." Quite possibly? 24 quantum fields and truly ridiculous amounts of time. Outside that? No one really knows. It _clearly_ doesn't require intelligence since it's been operating on automatic for 13.77 billion years, just doing what it always does. Making stars, exploding stars, and so on. Everything we actually understand about reality shows that it's all just stuff mindlessly doing the same thing over and over again because it lacks a mind with which to choose to do otherwise. "...when you split [an atom], you have a nuclear explosion..." Sure. But if you did that with just one atom, it wouldn't be much power. Each atom gives off 3.2x10^-11 joules of energy. Written another way, that's 0.000000000032 joules. Every second, a 60-Watt light bulb consumes 60 joules of energy. What makes a nuclear reactor or bomb so useful is that it can start a chain-reaction and affect _lots_ of atoms, which _all_ release that much energy. "...having all of these orbits..." No intelligence required. It's an unavoidable consequence of gravity being a thing. And, of course, it _also_ does things like fling planet-sized objects out into the galaxy or beyond while forming. 99% of planet-sized objects are 'rogue planets', ones that don't orbit a star. If you got your job right 1% of the time, pretty sure you'd be fired. "...something that is not bound by time and space the same way we are..." Quantum fields seem to more or less ignore space, and it's unclear how they deal with time. Have a nice day! P.S. TH-cam has a funny habit of hiding my replies to comments I get. So if you reply to my comment, I'll most likely get back to you in 36 to 72 hours, but you may not get a notification, and you might have to sort the comments on this video by 'Newest First' to actually see my comment at all.
MashaAllah awesome
"...you believe someone made this table... have you seen the maker..."
I do believe someone made the table, and I presume a _human_ someone, not aliens or pixies.
"...why do you believe someone made this table..."
Well, you see I'm familiar with the constituent components the table is made out of, including wood, metal, and so on. I have knowledge of how these things typically exist in nature, and how they move about generally, especially in large clumps such as we see here. And as part of that I notice a distinct lack of any process that they undergo normally that leads to table-like shapes. As a result, I conclude that something external happened to the different pieces to result in them looking so very unnatural.
I can do the _exact same thing_ with a bird's nest, or even an ant's burrow. By noticing how the building materials (twigs and leaves for the next, dirt for the ants) behaves on its own, I can easily work out that it has some sort of maker. Now this maker doesn't need language, or even thought, to do it, perhaps not even what we would call 'intelligence'. It simply has to function in a way that leads to it building this stuff out of other stuff. You can then ask if that thing that built it was, itself, the result of intelligence or not, but it turns out that 'not' is the correct answer. Living things are not, apparently, the result of intelligence.
"...what do you need to create a universe..."
Quite possibly? 24 quantum fields and truly ridiculous amounts of time. Outside that? No one really knows. It _clearly_ doesn't require intelligence since it's been operating on automatic for 13.77 billion years, just doing what it always does. Making stars, exploding stars, and so on. Everything we actually understand about reality shows that it's all just stuff mindlessly doing the same thing over and over again because it lacks a mind with which to choose to do otherwise.
"...when you split [an atom], you have a nuclear explosion..."
Sure. But if you did that with just one atom, it wouldn't be much power. Each atom gives off 3.2x10^-11 joules of energy. Written another way, that's 0.000000000032 joules. Every second, a 60-Watt light bulb consumes 60 joules of energy. What makes a nuclear reactor or bomb so useful is that it can start a chain-reaction and affect _lots_ of atoms, which _all_ release that much energy.
"...having all of these orbits..."
No intelligence required. It's an unavoidable consequence of gravity being a thing. And, of course, it _also_ does things like fling planet-sized objects out into the galaxy or beyond while forming. 99% of planet-sized objects are 'rogue planets', ones that don't orbit a star. If you got your job right 1% of the time, pretty sure you'd be fired.
"...something that is not bound by time and space the same way we are..."
Quantum fields seem to more or less ignore space, and it's unclear how they deal with time.
Have a nice day!
P.S. TH-cam has a funny habit of hiding my replies to comments I get. So if you reply to my comment, I'll most likely get back to you in 36 to 72 hours, but you may not get a notification, and you might have to sort the comments on this video by 'Newest First' to actually see my comment at all.