Impossible Universe: The Reality of Cosmic Fine Tuning
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ต.ค. 2020
- Reasonable Faith and Avoid Project team up for this cinematic short film on the impossible reality of our universe's finely-tuned, life-permitting existence.
For more resources visit: www.reasonablefaith.org/finet...
"Scientists have come to realize a startling truth- the universe looks suspiciously like a fix." -Paul Davies
Our existence is balanced on a razor's edge of incomprehensible good fortune.
From the first moment of its inception, the universe’s governing parameters appear to have been delicately calibrated to permit the existence of intelligent life. . . . . . . . . . . .
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 67 วันนี้!! คู่เอก "นักรบ vs ทาเกียร์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/eahGc1XmrEU/mqdefault.jpg)
"If i believe that the universe came to existence by chance, than i can believe Absolutely ANYTHING"-David Wood
So true...
Hey I know you
That's a statement born of the mindless belief that anything can happen. In short, he ALREADY believes that anything can happen. He believes food from thin air, storms the obey commands, people walking on water, dead people rising out of their graves,...
If as almost every other creationist, he's yapping about a universe from nothing, then his stupidness is common and uninteresting. The fact that he does not define what he means by "chance" leaves too much room for interpretation.
If you compare that to the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent being just happening to exist, what is more probable? What would be more fine-tuned: God of the universe? Which one is more perfect?
@@questionasker8791 I think your point would be "valid", if the universe was eternal in the past, but it had a beginning.
The more I study physics the more I believe in intelligent design for the universe.
You're getting closer Rick 🙂
How right you are. His Name is Jesus Christ.
Tex... to “Believe” is not really knowing Physics, Science is not based on belief, but on evidence, confirmation of theory to fact extracted from rigorous experimentation adhering to strict standards peer reviewed results which is a lot of work. Believing is easy, of course your beliefs are your choice, but they're NOT Physics or Science, can't keep your doughnut and eat it at the same time.
@@schrodingerskat8380 Kat - your understanding of both physics and "Belief" are naive. Physics does not preclude belief in an intelligent designer, and belief in an intelligent designer does not remove the necessity of physics. The two can co-exist nicely.
There is no need to lecture me on physics. I'm a 57 year old man with a MS Mech Eng degree. I'm fully aware of what physics entails. I don't have a PhD in Physics, but I'm certainly not naive on the subject.
Belief in an "intelligent designer" can come from blind faith, but it does not _require_ blind faith. The more I study the arguments for an intelligent designer, the more I believe in an intelligent designer. Some of the arguments by Dr. Craig support my case. Believing that life formed randomly takes a huge amount of faith in randomness. Believing that the planets formed naturally takes a huge amount of faith also. As Norman Geisler famously said, "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist".
@@rickintexas1584 You're in good company. The man who mentored me out of my atheism has a doctorate in applied physics from Stanford, has an I.Q. of 142, has had a STELLAR career (he's the kind of scientist most other scientists would give their right-arm to be), and has a wife whose "pedigree" and accomplishments rival his own (only her doctorate is in astrophysics, and she earned it at Rice). Oh; and he's the most committed, convinced, and startlingly theologically-knowledgeable CHRISTIAN I've ever encountered. [his wife's a Christian, too] 👍
God bless you Dr. Craig
That last line was particularly powerful. The universe is not just a random ensemble of natural phenomena. It is a place, a grand stage, for God to display not only His power, but a place where He can be revealed to a people which He has made for Himself.
Knowing those puts me in sheer awe of the magnitude of God's glory and His love for us infinitesimally finite beings in a speck of dust we call Earth.
"For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--all things have been created through Him and for Him.
He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together."
- Colossians 1:16-17
Glory be to the Lord God Almighty!
WLC is a National Treasure. Thank you Sir!! God Bless.
MAN! THIS GAVE ME THE GOOSEBUMPS!
That's real bro!
Wait until you meet the Creator Jesus Christ on Judgment Day. Make sure you have repented of your sins and come to faith in Him.
We need more people like WCL to follow his footsteps.
Don't worry. I'm on the right track, to be a worthy successor for WLC. Not only me but many other around the world. We equipping us with all necessary tools and using the RF website to be well prepared. 😊
Just amazing world we live in, truly.
Please pray for my grandpa Bill, he has cancer on his liver, gonna be rough on him. God bless
Tell him to try to hold on until they can grow a new one for him.
ExtantFrodo2 is this some kind of joke? If it is ur a sick bastard.
ExtantFrodo2 I hope we meet one day, cause ur going to swallow your front teeth
God bless you and God bless your grandpa
@@tristanmaxwell8403 maybe he is talking about future medical developments?
Such a beautiful put-together video!
His team's editing skills are tip top, shame his reasoning skills are so lacking
@@somerandom3247 ?
The heavens declare the glory of God
'God' is capitalized.
Psalm 19. Amen
"How extraordinary anything should exist" - the argument from personal incredulity
The guy in video is my friend!
Our universe is not just finely tuned but it’s beautiful
These videos are phenomenal! Thank you, Dr. Craig!
Phenomenal quality video, very interesting as well
Fantastic! What a blessed man you are, W.L.C
It's going to be a very sad day when WLC leaves us.
10 to the 20th power LIKES!!
I don't think TH-cam can count that high. *;-)*
If only hey 😂😂
Wow!! Amazing! Hits the fine tuning argument right in the guts!!! Bravo!!
Beautiful, professor.
Excellent video! Thanks Dr. Craig!
If someone uses the multiverse theory, we can slap the ontological argument back at them
Incredible video, thank you!
Excellent Video!
Wow Dr. This is an amazing production.
Loved this one!!!!
Thank you for the video!
Appreciate! Keep Standing Firm 24/7!
Please, Craig, Translate into Portuguese. 🙏😊
I am Brazilian, and I admire your books and debates a lot.
Hello!
You can email me at raul.jaramillo@reasonablefaith.org, I work with the RF team. We are translating material into Spanish and Portuguese. I can get you in touch with the Portuguese translators and the RF chapter directors in Brazil!
Yes, one of the greatest miracles of all is the ground we walk on. Only surpassed by God's willingness to save those that have committed cosmic treason of the highest caliber while walking on it.
Oh man, I love how you said that!!!
Don't forget about diseases and natural disasters killing children and babies. Serial killers and pedophiles were created by you god. I would never worship a jerk like that.
*_1John 5.9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater; for this is the witness of God which He has testified of His Son. 10 He who believes in the Son of God has the witness in himself; he who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed the testimony that God has given of His Son. 11 And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. 12 He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. 13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God._*
_Jesus Christ loves you. Repent and be saved. Only Jesus Christ saves. God bless you, and peace be upon you and your family in the name of Jesus Christ._
I ADMIRE YOU A LOT DR CRAIG. GREETINGS AND GODD BLESS YOU AND YOUR FAMILY
Greaat videoo!!
To Our God Be The Glory. Maker of the heaven and the earth.
May the CREATOR BLESS you.
That’s a really good point. It (the multiverse) completely invalidates probability... which most people would never hold to on a physically realisable level.
The multiverse does not invalidate probability, 😅😂🤣😂😅. Religious zealots fabricate fake science to prop up weak faith, its quite silly.
Thanks for the video Reasonable Faith! For anyone else interested, I recommend Luke Barne's book on fine-tuning as one of the best in its field.
A fortunate Universe. Very good book.
@Tauhida Khan LINKS TO WHAT?
I welcome any other book recommendation on this topic (I'll look into Luke Barne's).
@@namapalsu2364 That's honestly the best and the most comprehensive one, trust me.
@Tauhida Khan That's the book name up top. 'A fortunate universe'
Saying the universe happened by chance means they have no idea how the universe happened.
....and you do?
That's right. Random is a synonym for 'we don't see a pattern'.
It looks amazingg
The beautu & design of this universe makes the Taj Mahal seem like a dirty slum by comparison. Both were created to demonstrate maximum possible love by their creator.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Design, now that's a different can of worms. If there wasn't gravity pulling matter together to make stars, planets and galaxies some other force or effect would. We don't have info about 85% of the stuff the universe is made of yet claim to know how it is irrelevant to how changes would affect how things work? Ridiculous.
Still no one will say taj Mahal came by chance , but was designed by a man who lost his hand
This is amazing! It’s a blessing to know that GOD created ALL things since nothing can create itself without a purposeful design or plan.
Humans fabricated god for the things they didn't understand.
I had to look up multiverse. I thought it was a reference to comic books or a sci-fi movie. I suppose in a way, it is.
4:03
the tv shows a scene from the video of Fine Tuning Argument.
Reasons.org a ministry started by CalTech Astrophysicist Hugh Ross covers this topic in more depth.
Many thanks
"I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, and that is that i know nothing." -Socrates
The only thing I know for sure is that I don't know everything.
@@somerandom3247 that certainly trumps Socrates.
How do you know that?
@@TestifyApologetics Because when someone asks you about something you know don't know about you know for certain that you don't know about it. I don't know what color shirt you are wearing or even whether you are naked. So much for knowing everything.
This video is full of wild assertions. For example "Each of the parameters that governs the universe can take on a wide range of values". How does he know this? And if he does know it then what is the range? Is it infinite? What's the probability distribution of possible values? What's the mean expected value? If you don't know these then I don't see how it's possible to make the argument. You are just left with a feeling, an intuition, that the universe if fine-tuned.
And it still doesn't explain how a god just happens to be so 'finely tuned' that it is able to plan, design and create universes. Did god learn to make universes by trial and error...or did it just serendipitously happen to know exactly HOW to fine tune a universe without ever having done it? And is this the best it could have done...create a universe that, from all appearances is essentially devoid of life EXCEPT for a small rocky planet in one solar system in one galaxy amongst billions? And couldn't it avoid making a world that was vulnerable to sin? Why go to all the trouble to create a world just to have it wrecked by the first humans that were created? For all that matters, why create a physical world at all? Humans are souls that just happen to have a physical body...per most theists...so why bother with the physical body at all. The same goal could've been reached by just creating human souls in a spiritual world where we could commune with god eternally without the combersome trappings of a natural world that could be corrupted by sin.
"Each of the parameters that governs the universe can take on a wide range of values."
But how do we know this? Given there is only one universe under observation, and each of the parameters that are fine-tuned take on only one value?
How do we know, for example, that the gravitational constant could have taken on one of the other one-in-10^60 possible values?
I have two questions:
1. Why life only exists if the universe is fine tuned?
2. Why can we see the possibility of the universe not being fine tuned.
You asked an Incomprehensible question.
But if it is fine tuned why so much natural death and disasters? Couldn’t the fine tuner have tuned it a little finer to allow for a better safer life on earth. Can anyone help with this? Or have I misunderstood the argument.
When you look at Creation as a whole and you look at all the intricate details of it and how everything works, it will BAFFLE you! But yet our children are being taught it all happened by accident! It just amazes me because if you went outside and you told someone that no one made their phones or (better yet) their PENCIL and that those things they use every day just all came together by random luck through unguided natural processes then they would probably send you to the hospital and yet it is those same people who believe Creation and LIFE itself happened by accident.
What baffles me is the ignorance of not understanding how life became fine tuned for this universe, stupid design and grown adults believing in an invisible magic man who lives in the sky and will torture you forever because he loves you! 😅😂🤣😂😅
Yes, people believe that in the 21st century! SMH
@@marveloussoftware1417 And there are also who believe that the earth is flat, but that doesn't mean I am to look down upon them or you or anyone else. You are a fellow human being created in the image of God. The question we need to ask ourselves is this, have we been taught something that is contrary to what we typically experience? What I mean by that is this, my experiences of life tells me any time, any where I see Order & Design, there is ALWAYS an intelligent mind behind it. 100 times out of 100 times the answer is yes. And to answer your question, it actually makes MUCH more sense to believe in an invisible magic man that made everything rather than NOTHING making everything. Please, answer that question honestly. Which one sounds more logical to you? That someone had to make everything or that nothing made everything? God bless you my friend and I pray that you come to know the truth.
@@aolish actually god was created by humans to look like them.
If there really is a god then he's either a lazy bum, stupid or sadistic. Any one who would torture their son to death is a terrible being.
This is a very well made video.
What do you guys think of the idea that time is relative. As in our basis of time is set on something that can be changed. As in our most precise clock is based off the atom. What if the very nature of atoms were changed? This would explain the carbon dating of billions of years.
What do you mean by "our basis of time"? Like how we determine how long a second is? The second is merely a measurement of time, as is dawn and dusk. We think time passes because things at least appear to happen after each other. Time would perhaps stop if the smallest changes in the universe stopped. So we could say time will run out just the same way as energy will run out (if indeed the smallest changes rely on energy).
Carbon dating cannot be used to date anything older than ~50k years (if I remember geology class well). It is also not very accurate and is being replaced by something akin to uranium dating. Point is, no one uses Carbon dating to date anything billions of years old.
I assume that’s a way to defend YEC, but my problem with that is that if God changed physics just to make it appear that the universe is older, that seems rather deceitful.
However, on the topic that time is relative, I’ve heard a theory that time goes faster as space expands faster, and while I doubt it’s true, it’s really fascinating because it would explain why everything feels like time flies when they’re older.
It’s a fun topic.
@@vaskaventi6840 God did not change Physics to make things look older.
1. He created everything fully formed. Adam and Eve were not created as babies, but as adults. Trees, birds, fish and mammals were created as adults able to reproduce. The sun and the moon were not just blobs of hydrogen and cosmic dust that grew over time into what we see today.
2. Our methods of measuring the age of things are based on certain assumptions, which in turn are rooted in an evolutionary philosophy and framework.
@@alexmala6483 If God created everything to look old and show old results in tests, doesn’t that seem deceitful? Every scientific test we do shows that things are very old, why would God make a world like that when it will deceive so many? Doesn’t it make more sense to say that Genesis 1-11 (like many other books in the Bible) is semi poetic?
@@vaskaventi6840 No. See point 2 in my previous reply. Our 'science' cannot be trusted when it comes to extrapolations into the past.
To my mind I’ve always felt there’s some overlap between the fine tuning argument for God and the ontological argument for God. After all if the fine tuning argument inevitably leads to the conclusion that every possible world exists “out there”, and we cannot (with integrity) exclude a maximally great being (God) existing in one of those possible worlds, then (by definition) that maximally great being exists in this world.
1400 years ago:
"We will show Our signs to them in the horizons of the external world and within themselves, until it becomes clear to them that it's the truth. Is your Lord not sufficient? He is a witness over all things."
Holy Quran 41:53
Has it never occurred to you that prior to our somewhat stable universe (in which this present epoch of conditions able to support life is very brief only to be followed by trillions of trillions of years of nothing but black holes), only got this way following a near infinite stretch of time in which universe creations miscarried and that any previous incarnations that presented conditions like ours does now eventually dissolved into the ashes of black holes forming a universe sized B-E condensate only to have another go at it?
Tee hee! 😜
Excellent video
WLC states that these values have a wide range of possibilities. There is actually no evidence that they can be anything other than what they are. You cant calculate the probability of something without fully understanding what caused those things to be
I met somebody, and we talked about 'on perpose tuned universe'. but in my opinion the ones who might create this universe should be exist already in some kind of frame, or dimension, so the one (He?) who might have create this one was/were already way more advanced than we are, to able to do this. So, coincidence had to start somewhere, and in that case defenately not a God
Why is the comment turned on?
So people can comment? I don't understand the question.
@@thomasakatidalforce7987 Because usually the comments are turned off.
Dunno. But I'm glad it is open. Because I wanna see other people's opinions and I might learn more about from their ideas
I love the clip and I’m so grateful to God for WLC, but 10^20 isn’t 10 followed by 20 zeroes , it’s 1 followed by 20 zeroes
Reverse Uno well played
If you believe in a God who is omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent, do you believe He was fine-tuned, or do you think He just happens to be perfect in every way?
Strictly speaking, a Christian would probably believe God has always been perfect. The interesting thing about WLC is his ideas presented in this video don't really point to a personal god.
Hey I am a christian and do not beliefe in microevolution. My professor for biodiversity says that all organisms are related to each other, beacuse of the ribosomal RNA, interlocking genes and the fact, that our metabolism consists of the same components (e.g. proteins from L-amino acid)
. What are you all thoughts about this?
Greetings from Germany!
What are your thoughts on the order of the fossils in the geological column? It shows radical changes in species and ecosystems over time. No evolution? Ridiculous.
I think you meant that you do not believe in macroevolution. I think everyone believes in microevolution.
@@brucev8339 yeah, I meant that, but already said it 😁
Actually, what Christians don't believe in is macroevolution as it pertains to the idea of 'emergence'. A great article to illustrate what I mean is CS Lewis' essay, 'Funeral of a great myth'.
I didn't understood his Refutation of Multiverse???
Can anyone bother to Explain
I didn’t quite understand this rendition of the objection, but the one I’ve seen Dr. Craig refer to before is called the Boltzmann Brain problem, which says that, because it is far more likely that our brains are just the result of random quantum vacuum fluctuations or nucleation (a Boltzmann brain) than that we actually live in a finely-tuned universe and evolved, that we should be a Boltzmann brain and should be experiencing the occasional completely incoherent or abnormal event due to the completely random nature of potential Boltzmann brains, but we don’t, which makes a multiverse HIGHLY unlikely
@Sadat Nafis The Multiverse is a philosophical construct, not a scientific one. It cannot be observed, tested or proven. It was imagined as a desperate attempt to come up with an alternative to the creation and intelligent design explanation, which fits much better our observations.
@@alexmala6483 Still isn't it a Logical Possibility????
So it could have been a Multiverse
I know Multiverse violates Occum's Razor though
@@sadatnafis2032 No. We must distinguish between 'possibilities' and 'imagination'. Not everything we can imagine is possible. Possible means that there is a chance of it happening. Holywood succeed to blur that distinction but real life is not Hollywood.
@@alexmala6483 I'm sorry, but you simply can not broach the claim that other tunings could not produce life-hospitable universes and simultaneously forbid discussion of what other universes might be. Both claims "this universe is fine tuned" and "some other universe could also be hospitable to life" reside firmly in the camp of speculation that these parameters have variations from which one can choose and not in any arena of evidence. Maybe the local stuff that our universe was made from only permitted this set of parameters which could differ from far remote universes made from stuff that locally had somewhat different parameters. Being isolated is not the same as being singular or even unique however much it may appear to be the case to the one who is isolated.
"Indeed, in the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alternation of the night and the day are signs for those of understanding"
QS 3:190
"Who remember Allah while standing or sitting or [lying] on their sides and give thought to the creation of the heavens and the earth, [saying], "Our Lord, You did not create this aimlessly; exalted are You [above such a thing]; then protect us from the punishment of the Fire."
QS 3:191
Life would only appear in universes capable of supporting some kind of life. If you understand that life can arise under any physics that allow for some form of substance formation that can produce any kind of self replicating complexes, not just atoms, molecules and carbon based life which is one form of life we see in this universe - you might find that 50% of all universes are capable of sustaining some form of life. What does fine tuning mean then?
A) If the universe is fine tuned for life, why is it such a damned desert?
B) How many other different modes of matter could harbor life?
I think it's relevant to ask not just whether life as we know it would/could develop in an alternately tuned universe but take into account that life might arrange from vastly different time scales or size scales depending on the characteristics of matter in that universe. We've seen that evolution works regardless of the medium it runs in (biological or computers) so it's fair to assume it would work the same in any universe if it sustained variant replicators.
C) Most of the mass of the universe is composed of matter we know almost nothing about. Isn't calling our universe fine-tuned ignoring how that matter would behave under different constants?
We cannot rule out other forms of matter than molecules in the universe as building blocks of complex systems. While atomic nuclei, for example, do not exhibit the diversity & complexity seen in the way atoms assemble into molecular structures, perhaps they might be able to do so in a universe with different properties & laws. Sufficient complexity & long life may be the only ingredients needed for a universe to have some form of life. Those who argue that life is highly improbable need to open their minds to the possibility that life might be likely with many different configurations of laws & constants of physics. Furthermore, nothing in anthropic reasoning indicates any special preference for human life, or indeed intelligent or sentient life of any sort--just an inordinate fondness for carbon.
I appreciate how the Cosmological Constant can be made to seem impressive to an uncritical mind. Please notice however that invariably when the specificity of certain properties of things in this universe are shown to be unable to be changed without ruining everything - it is always done in the context of *changing only that one factor.* We have only one observable universe and no data about what it came from so we can have no theory of universe making. However, it strikes me as dishonest to conjecture the change of one constant yet always leave out the possibility of *changing a plurality of constants* (which for all we know could offset any detrimental effects).
Also, the stunningness of the Cosmological Constant is directly linked to the presence of life that it "enabled" - correct? Yet I wonder how you would claim that life of some sort could not arise in different kinds of universes (or more to the point, *what is the ratio of toxic vs hospitable universes*). It would seem to me that that would be the more significant figure.
The Cosmological Argument has many assumptions at it's root. The first premise is that there is more than this universe (god), so this closes you off from insisting we limit ourselves to there being only one universe. It often argues fine tuning, citing how a tiny change of one constant destroys the possibility of everything we know. But it never considers multiple co-balancing changes. It never considers how possible life is in OTHER PHYSICS. How much can we know when it's 96% non-baryonic matter?
For a very very tiny amount of a very tiny percent of the universe's matter, conditions at a certain scale were such that within that very narrow range of substrate conditions a self replicating substance arose. This is NOT what ones calls a universe fine tuned for life.
To begin with, FT arguments conjecture that alternate values of the constants are conceivable so let us not try to trash the following objection by ignoring that conjecture. To sum up the FT argument, the constants that exist are really the only ones that could possibly allow life. Usually one is presented with astoundingly strict values 32 decimal places long which changing any one of them would cause one or another equally devastating results. But this ignores not only what results might occur if you are changing 2 or more of the constants simultaneously, but also how the unknown properties of the invisible & as yet uncharacterized 96% of the matter of the universe would change as a result of the change of those constants (or indeed, what percentage of those constants is DUE to the properties of DM & DE).
Also unconsidered is that life of an entirely different nature might develop under different physics.
*Is nature too uncongenial for life to have developed naturally or is it exquisitely designed to have done so? You can't have it both ways.*
I'd argue chance doesn't exist itself as a solution, for chance to be, there has to be a system that holds the chances as possiblities. And neither the system nor the chance isn't "nothing" (because nothing is absolutely nothing) and nothing can come out of nothing by itself. Thus again you need Creator.
Who says this all came from nothing?
@@ExtantFrodo2 a surprising amount of naturalists
@@vaskaventi6840 Anyone who says it has no evidence to support the claim.
So it was the story from the Kalevala which explains the world. Or is it Odin,or maybe Zeus? And what about the Corn Mother?
Or atheism... Why is atheism/naturalism going to explain it among all the hypotheses?
BooM
Anyone ever play d&d? Or poker? Or roulette? Or any game that uses chance?
Pretty much every time you play any of these games you witness a series of events that is less likely to occur than imaginable.
Atoms in the universe... roughly 10^80.
Recording all the rolls for the group of an average d&d session? Roughly 20^100.
It's literally less likely than 1/(the # of atoms in the universe). That's not an argument for cthulhu.
That's what measuring hindsight does. It's pretty overwhelming... until you think about it. Then it's pretty underwhelming.
Happy gaming.
"The heavens, We have built them with power. And verily, We are expanding it" (Qur'an - 51:47).
And many more mysteries can be resolved if one can at least read and try to acknowledge what Qur'an says.
life adapts to the universe, not the other way around, no?
I think his argument takes 1 step back from what you said. If I am understanding correctly he is saying life(as we know it at least) couldn't adapt to the universe without a specific set "laws" in place to make it happen.
The fact that as far as we can tell, the majority of the universe is devoid of life invalidates this statement. Biological systems require a very tight envelope of conditions to operate.. they can adapt within this envelope, but they can’t go beyond it. The universal constants did not have to encompass this envelope, in fact there are far more way in which they wouldn’t encompass this envelope, than there are in which they would.
@@zacharysylvester8349 well all life that we currently observe at least, or know exists have to adhere to those tight 'rules.' but still life adapted to use those resources to the best of its benefit
@@somenothing7914 Well I’d argue that life has been designed with some adaptive malleability. Pre-adaptive optimisation, but with strict limits.
@@zacharysylvester8349 ok
When you put the word "incomprehensibly" into numbers, you'll be like Dr. Lennox became a Christian.
You're looking at this backwards: the universe is not tuned for us........WE ARE TUNED TO THE UNIVERSE. It is true that any variation in the natural constants may well preclude life as we know it, but who among us can say that life of another sort may have come to be in a universe with altered natural constants? We have absolutely no way of knowing, do we. Being that this is our only experience with life in a universe how can we say with any authority there are no other possibilities for universes and life? Likewise, there is absolutely no evidence that this particular universe (or any other for that matter) was created by anyone or anything. There are only stories in an old book written by bronze age authors with no other contemporary sources to confirm them. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence to be believed. I see no evidence at all for creation or fine tuning, extraordinary or otherwise.
'Us being fine tuned to the universe' is merely a presupposition based on the rest of of your comment that cannot be proven either.
The argument from the fine tuning of the universe is merely one argument of many pertaining to the likelihood or probability of a spiritual reality outside and transcendant of nature. All we are saying is that there is a higher reality in which the human eye doesn't see and, therefore, human logic doesn't comprehend.
Besides, these cosmological arguments are the weakest of all. Better evidences of the existence of God are, morality and ethics, DNA and design, the mind and conscience, knowledge of evil, the existence and knowledge of metaphysical truths, imperical evidence of metaphysical truths in human character, accomplishment of Biblical prophesies, and the list goes on and on.
In the big picture, atheism represents a profound minority within the realms of human existence. It's likely that the modern atheist worldview is a product of the industrial revolution and its associated literature.
Source: CS Lewis' - Funeral of a great myth.
Christians don't simply pin their hopes to one argument, we view one argument from the perspective of other arguments.
Sean Carroll debunked this argument years ago.
The universe could contain as many as 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars, surely the universe is fine-tuned for lots of stars. But hold on, 95% of the matter in the universe is dark matter and dark energy so forget the stars this is what it's fine-tuned for. But no, that's all wrong, it's actually fine-tuned for me. The purpose of all this and the 14 billions years (and counting) has been for me to live my 80 odd years on earth. Praise the Lord!
If love to know how atheists could explain this away
Lol they can’t.
@@lawrencesmith1985 Christopher Hitchens says "you don't know and neither do I" lol
@@josephsack4918 he doesn’t know but I do 😊
@@lawrencesmith1985 it amazes me how much faith atheists apply.
@@josephsack4918 I believe it’s because they know GOD exist but they aren’t taking time out to know who he is, as far as his character. Their number 1 problem is that they deem the Bible as a fallacy not knowing that it’s the only book ever written by man, with GOD being the author, that explicitly tells us of life’s past, present, and future destruction of this sinful world. The Bible annihilates the atheist self righteous, materialistic, world views. And they hate that lol
It seems to me if the multiverse is correct that simply proves Hinduism is correct. An infinite amount of universe is bound to have deities in it after all.
"The more I examine the universe and the details of its architecture, the more evidence I find that the universe in some sense must have known we were coming."
That is an argument for pantheism.
I think is just a way to say that the universe was made for humans
My dad said to me that many years ago there was a rabbi who always used to go to this diner. One day he told him and the people around him that you can see the beauty of God everywhere in nature. I have to say, this is true. The more I look at anatomy, animals, plants, the planets, galaxies, the universe and everything in nature I see design. I see God's handy work in all the beauty and chaos in the universe. I of course do accept evolution and natural selection to explain the diversity of life, but I believe that God is the guide and designer behind it all.
But I still see Fine tuning arguments to be god of the gaps type of arguments
There's literally logically only 3 ways to explain away the Fine turning of the universe;
A) By chance
B) By necessity
C) By Design.
You're gonna have to argue that it is more plausible to believe the fine tuning is by chance or it's own necessity than by a Designer.
Yeah, good luck.
@@leonardu6094 no such argument is needed plausibility is dish water. Lets just wait until we get a better scientific handle on these problems. You can keep your plausibility if it makes you feel better.
@@bartholomewtott3812
"Plausibility is dishwater"
Lol come back to me when you actually get a clue on what the fine tuning is. This is the stupidest and most uneducated response I've ever read in my life- i don't even know why i replied.
I disagree... there is still science and mathmatics to explain how it is/was done dealing with everything(science and mathmatics to me are how God does basically just about everything.)
To me God is the guy behind all existence both what we know and what we dont but that doesnt reduce the mysteries that drive science to do the work and understand how.
Yes God did it....from 1+1 to infinity. God of the gaps? ...no.... God of it all.
To claim random chance and necessity ...requires more faith than any religion to ever exist...(my opinion)
It is more reasonable to believe in Creator than nothing comes from something.
It is more reasonable to believe the stuff the universe is made of has always and will always exist in one form or another than to conjecture a being of infinite power and knowledge.
@@ExtantFrodo2 Uhm, no. It is literally a scientific fact that the Universe and thus its components are not eternal.
@@Ivann1005 we don't know what quarks or gluons are made of or whether those things are eternal.
@@ExtantFrodo2 It is true that we do not know what quarks and gluons are made of but they aren't eternal that's for sure. They came into existence very shortly after the Big Bang which means they are not eternal, nor is the Universe.
@@Ivann1005 not eternal because of sin effect
You will never be able to prove god exists or not. If you could that would violate faith and freedom of choice.
It would stand to reason that the pertinent choice would be not whether you are gullible enough to believe (who could really actually choose what they believe?), but whether you love god or hate it? THERE is a choice that makes a difference? No?
The universe is complex therefore noahs ark and samsons magical hair are tenable world views
What do those things have to do with this argument, try to refute the argument instead of using the strawman fallacy.
@@kenandzafic3948 the clips argument is literally "the universe is complex therefore said religion is true"
@@IIrandhandleII
No it isn't, the argument is that the universe is fine tuned for life and that intelligent design is the best explanation for it and has nothing to do with any religion.
@@kenandzafic3948 life was not intelligently designed it was naturally designed, humans are a product of iterationsof natural selection. All biologists of all religions accept this. Whether you want to say yahweh, Allah or Zeus kicked off the process it is the environment that selected everything you see.
To summarize the argument:
We don't know why the universal constants are the values that they are, therefore god must have done it.
Wrong. It’s a deductive argument using the disjunctive syllogism and the three hypothesis on the fine tuning.
@@Voivode.of.Hirsir
Its nothing more than a god of the gaps argument.
@@somerandom3247 Do you have a better argument ?
@@somerandom3247 Didn’t you read what I just wrote? Would you like me to repeat it?
@@Voivode.of.Hirsir wrong. It's pretending that he's presented a solid argument when in fact he has left out crucial factors. Indeed, if you limit the set of possible tunings to those derived from changing only one parameter you will certainly only obtain a very limited number of viable universes. Now allow multiple parameters to change in concert - balancing, equilibriating... Who's to say what number of viable universes could be formed. In short, his argument falls squarely on the flat side of ignorant and self serving.
If there is a God, the God-deniers become prisoners of an accountability that is unimaginable and unacceptable to them, therefore for them God does not exist! To live free from all bondage and to die free. The compulsory acceptance of death is part of philosophy.
That is an absurd notion that has been passed around by theists...ie that someone somehow convinces himself there isn't a god to avoid being accountable to a god. If I somehow became convinced there was a god, I'd imagine a god that agreed with me on everything. So I would easily be living according to the god I imagined. Isn't that what you do? What does (your) God think it wrong that you don't also agree is wrong? And what does (your) God think is right that you don't also agree is right? Is there anything you have to do, morally, to please your god that you wouldn't do on your own if you thought there was no god?
@@rizdekd3912 Since there is a God, the God-deniers are prisoners of an unimaginable and unacceptable accountability. It makes no difference whether they believe in this God or not. It must be accepted that to deny this God is death to man. This is what biblical revelation says, not me.
@@ii.gondolkodo3169 " It makes no difference whether they believe in this God or not. " I agree...belief in god is irrelevant since no one seems to know anything concrete about god. It is purely academic whether one believes in god or not. You apparently believe in a god and have your notion of what god is and what it wants. But others also believe in god but believe totally different things about god. It is fairly safe to assume neither of you really know.
@@rizdekd3912 It is fairly safe to assume neither of you really know. - And that's your faith. If you are wrong, you have lost.
@@ii.gondolkodo3169 " If you are wrong, you have lost."
What have I lost? Why should I be concerned about being wrong about how the universe began?
“Reasonable Faith” is one of the best example of an Oxymoron, Incongruous and contradictory, as “Faith” does not need Reason to exist all that is needed is belief, therefore all Faith is by definition Unreasonable.
Yes! Dr Craig its all the great wizard! Its all magic!! It cant be chance its magic
@J w nonsense I don’t believe in magic. I believe reality is governed by laws and that we just haven’t discovered all these laws yet
I think WLC is an educated, logical person, but I've never really understood how he makes the jump to Christianity. If anything, he makes a good case for Deism though.
Maybe because there is evidence for Christianity to be true?
This is because in this video he is just proving the existence of God. There are other videos on this channel that build on the existence of God and prove that the Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.
Here before Rationality Rules “Debunks” this video 😂
Good luck.
Debunks this video? RR couldn’t debunk cat poop found under a plucked hen.
"Answer a fool according to his folly lest you be like him"...
You take the false evolution big bang premise and refute atheism with it.
So even the arguments based on what atheists propose turn out to be false.
Now the truth is God created the universe in 6 literal days 6000 years ago as described in God's perfect Word, the KJB!
View "refuting compromise" by Jonathan Sarfati.... and Jason lisle. .... "Ultimate proof of creation ".
The implication that physicists came up with the multiverse to placate a bunch of creationists is laughable. Physicists are busy people and don't spend any time at all worrying about what creationists think.
Actually the multiverse is something predicted by string theory. Very few non physicists (including me and probably WLC) would have sufficient understanding of string theory to understand its implications. So we make marvel movies and pseudoscience TH-cam videos instead
Theologians Christian, or otherwise should stay with theology, and leave Science to Scientists.
Because the God explanation is always the same Ad Nauseam for anything and everything, DrCraig in another video where the comments are conveniently turned off , affirms “God Is the Best Explanation of the Fine-Tuning of the Universe for Intelligent Life”. It appears that in the absence of reason God and the Bible are the best explanation for the Mediocre thought and Lazy mind.
Seven-year remedial course coming up.
The very obvious error here is that he is only altering ONE variable at a time and insisting that covers all bases when in fact any number of counterbalancing equalizing parameters might well exist if one only does not artificially constrain themselves to the unusual situations of only changing one variable. When in fact the number of parameter combinations when tweaking multiple constants is exponentially more vast. Think you can wrap your head around that Mr Craig? Then wait, my next comment will sure ge your knickers in a twist. If the true number of universes in which intelligent life could evolve is 50 percent of all universes, then what becomes of your "fine tuning" argument?
I think you misunderstand the argument. It has been seen that in reality, every action has a reaction. If one were to alter one variable, one could create a chain reaction that affects the rest of the variables and constants, and reality would be different. An example of this could be the Genetic sequence of an organism. All genes have to be in their right spots, and if one is altered, problems or "glitches" can happen. Just take Cancer. When a person has cancer due to genetic passing, it is usually because one single gene was mutated badly. This creates a chain reaction, and the whole organism is affected.
@@nasasjanitor994 *"reality would be different" *
Duh! You are obliged to show how those "different realities" can't produce intelligent life of some sort in some way and then figure how improbable intelligent life is given all possible universes.
Jesus is Lord
The fine tuning of the biblical flat earth is more impressive than satan's heliocentric universe
The Bible doesn't say the Earth is flat.
@@pascalarancibia5199 the Bible doesn't say Jesus is Jewish either.
Jesus never practiced Judaism nor claimed to be Jewish.
@@thBrilliantFool Wow haha. No famous bible character explicitly mentioned that he was Jewish but it is taken as a fact due to the geographical context (Israel) and the Jews wrote their genealogies, and well, Jesus was according to the bible, born in the tribe of Judah, an Israelite group.
....and the award for the maddest comment goes to.... Danny Glover (no not the actor) but this guy... LOL
th-cam.com/play/PLLz-rtdRnfEC8xECr67f8YG_LvIlCtjsO.html
The first sentence out of his mouth is a lie. The rest of the video isn't much better.
His first sentence was, that most scientist think that universe is fine-tuned. If you read Steven Hawking book "A brief history of time" you will see that even Steven Hawking admitted that universe is fine-tuned. So why are you saying that it is a lie?
@@juozapasjurksa1400
Because it is a lie.
Go read that book again.
@@somerandom3247 and also in his first sentence he quoted physicist Paul Davies, so that was not lie if Paul Davies actually said that
😅😂🤣😂😅
This is ridiculous. Over 99.999% of the universe is fatal to life. There's huge portions of this planet that are fatal to life.
According to the theory of evolution, which is supported by tons of evidence and can be witnessed, all life that is not tuned enough to live on earth dies. So what we end up with is life that has evolved, or been fine tuned, to live on earth but NOT the universe.
Maximum cringe
All Glory and praise to God Almighty , how can you turn your back on him and reject him .