Evidence for God from Science

So I have a couple of things to discuss and ask questions on. My knowledge of science is nowhere near as advance as some people here, but I do programming in college so I'd still like to believe I have a relatively logic mind. So I am in danger of posting something extremely low level with tons of conter arguements but hopefully any of you will do me the mercy of being nice about it and appreciate the effort


I myself am sort've agnostic but I'll be speaking all Atheist beliefs as fact for my questions (purely for arguements sake)

First Question
We're all in agreement that if Atheism is correct, there has to be Alien life out there right? I mean life is already a miracle, but with the sheer mass of the universe it'd be impossible for Earth to be the only planet inhabited with life. So for arguements sake there are "Aliens". I read that there is a 2% genetic difference between human beings and chimps. Now if such a slight change can be the drastic difference between building airports, sending rockets into space, being the dominant species on earth, creating art and literature (and well I don't need to go on about what we've achieve I'm sure) then perhaps another 2% might achieve things we can only dream about.

The Universe has been around a long time. If there are aliens there have to be aliens more intelligent and advanced than us. Not only that but the difference between us and chimps could be the difference between us and aliens times 100. We've already monitored a few planets and found no signs of life. Travelled to the moon and back. If there is alien life out there, far, far more intelligent than us then surely they would have means of monitoring hundreds and hundreds of planets near their home. You'd feel proud of a chimp painting a picture. What if every accomplishment we've had to date is only a pretty picture to this other race. Wouldn't they have found us by now with that kind of knowledge and understanding?

Also if the evolution of knowledge is boundless isn't it complete arrogance to think we've figured absolutely anything out really? In terms of the universe and creation especially. Do we think that in a million years the next dominant species beyond us will applaud and think "we're grateful that the mysterious origins of the universe were discovered in the year 2000 because it's left us with so much free time". My point with that is if history follows any sort of pattern at all in terms of science in 200 years won't they be looking back saying "look how far we've come, we didn't really know anything did we".

I can understand the concept of science being a continous forming of stepping stones towards discovery, but Atheism has already made it's mind up about a few things. (The fact that there can't be a God in whatever they discover) isn't it only a matter of time before these stepping stones present new laws and rules that need to be kept to that may obscure more possibilities? Also if The Big Bang theory and such are stepping stones then why would any self-aware Atheists speak it as fact. The skeptic in me says it's become a competition against religion. They are compesating so much for the certainty that religous people have with their beliefs that they need to speak everything as finite fact or they won't be heard. I call this the mother-son method. When a mother and her teenage son argue they are usually shouting trying to drown out the other persons arguement to establish some kind of dominance or higher role.


Second Question
As Atheist the idea of fate isn't on the table. So it's more of every action has a reaction right? But then I think about my own personal existance. All the little tiny details that happened in history for me to be here. What if one of my ancestors hadn't had intercourse the exact time he did to pregnate his wife.. what about his children.. or their children.. it can go on and on forever, all the very slight details that have happened. You could've easily never been born and never sat here and knew life or had to ask such questions, but for some reason against all the odds here you are. If you think about it, the odds of you ever being alive in the first place a billions and billions and billions to one. It'd be like winning the lottery 100 times in a row. Doesn't that say something about some people's own personal belief in fate? We're very lucky to be here and be asking these questions and enjoying all the beauties life has to offer.

mickaneso wrote:I myself am sort've agnostic

If you are agnostic, why does your profile say you are Christian? There is an incongruency there.

mickaneso wrote:We're all in agreement that if Atheism is correct, there has to be Alien life out there right?

Atheism and aliens have nothing to do one with the other. Another incongruency.

What exactly are you and what is it you are trying to say?

FL

I'm a bit on and off Christian which is why I go with Agnostic more.

Aliens and Atheism have everything to do with each other. Think about it, Earth is a speck of dust in the grand scale of the universe. If it is the only place with life then that is an outstanding miracle beyond belief and that absolutely can not be coincidence or chance. Not those odds. Which would point to Intelligent Design. So if you are Atheist in my opinion you absolutely have to accept the fact that life exists elsewhere.

Put it this way. There are supposedly more suns in the universe than there are grains of sand on earth. And they'll have planets orbitting them too.

I'll answer a few questions/points on here.

I read that there is a 2% genetic difference between human beings and chimps.

This is a slightly misleading statistic. I won't bore you with the details of genetics, but it is not precisely what percentage of our genes are the same, but which genes are in fact the same and where the differences lie. You also need to take into account that we share many genes with different species that are not expressed. For instance, like all primates, humans have the genetic information that codes for a fully functional tail. Of course, those genes are "turned off" in humans so that we don't have a tail, but technically speaking those genes don't differ from those in a chimp by much at all.

Also, in terms of genetics, 2% of our genes being different is actually a staggering number of changes that have to be made, and by no means just a slight difference.

then perhaps another 2% might achieve things we can only dream about.

Well, I hate to be a cynic, but I don't think it is necessarily accurate to say that the genetic difference between us and chimps is 2% of improvement. In many capacities I agree with you, but genetics can't really be talked about easily in terms of good or bad. Everything is circumstantial. For instance, chimps as they are now are an extremely good creature for the way they live. Their intellectual capabilities might be limited (but still underestimated in my opinion), but their physical prowess outmatches the human race in every way.

there has to be Alien life out there right?

One could logically infer that there is life elsewhere in the universe, but I wouldn't go so far as to say it is a certainty. One would also have to consider that life might not always fall under our definition of life. Perhaps on Earth life follows certain rules and nothing exists outside those rules on Earth, but you can't discount the possibility that in different conditions that life might be very different and possibly more readily occurring. Of course, we don't know that, but the point I'm making is that everything on that topic, regardless of your worldview, is strictly speculation. I would even say that from a Christian perspective that alien life is a possibility, too.

If there are aliens there have to be aliens more intelligent and advanced than us.

Despite what Star Trek might have you believe, once again this is purely speculative. It also depends on your definition of "advanced." I mean, who is to say whether us harnessing space travel is more or less advanced than aliens can travel in space without machines? We might find that incredibly advanced, but for all we know their perspective might find that our computers and spaceships and weapons are more advanced than them.

Wouldn't they have found us by now with that kind of knowledge and understanding?

Once again, purely speculative. Even if there is a human-like race with knowledge and technology a hundred times more advanced than ours, how is it a definite possibility that they've found us? What if they live billions of light years away from us? You can speculate all you want, but presuming that aliens would have to have found us by now is kind of silly. What if they came here 3 billion years ago and found no intelligent life and just left?

but Atheism has already made it's mind up about a few things. (The fact that there can't be a God in whatever they discover) isn't it only a matter of time before these stepping stones present new laws and rules that need to be kept to that may obscure more possibilities?

You seem to be mixing atheism with science as if they are the same thing. I can tell you that they absolutely are not. While I agree that atheists have generally "made their mind up" that there is no God, could you not also say that theists have closed their minds to the possibility that there is no God? It cuts both ways in this case. On the other hand, most scientists (regardless of faith) will tell you that science is beyond the realm of religion, in the sense that no discovery will ever prove or disprove God. It simply isn't within the framework of science to be able to answer those questions of faith.

As far as stepping stones...Of course new laws and rules can obscure different possibilities. Our current laws and such really don't leave any room for flat-Earth Theory or alchemy. Is that a bad thing?

Atheism isn't a belief, but a lack of a belief in any god. The new religion you might be thinking of is scientific naturalism, but it's more of an idealistic philosophy more than a religion, since there is no deities or rituals involved.

Ivellious wrote:I'll answer a few questions/points on here.

I read that there is a 2% genetic difference between human beings and chimps.

This is a slightly misleading statistic. I won't bore you with the details of genetics, but it is not precisely what percentage of our genes are the same, but which genes are in fact the same and where the differences lie. You also need to take into account that we share many genes with different species that are not expressed. For instance, like all primates, humans have the genetic information that codes for a fully functional tail. Of course, those genes are "turned off" in humans so that we don't have a tail, but technically speaking those genes don't differ from those in a chimp by much at all.

Also, in terms of genetics, 2% of our genes being different is actually a staggering number of changes that have to be made, and by no means just a slight difference.

then perhaps another 2% might achieve things we can only dream about.

Well, I hate to be a cynic, but I don't think it is necessarily accurate to say that the genetic difference between us and chimps is 2% of improvement. In many capacities I agree with you, but genetics can't really be talked about easily in terms of good or bad. Everything is circumstantial. For instance, chimps as they are now are an extremely good creature for the way they live. Their intellectual capabilities might be limited (but still underestimated in my opinion), but their physical prowess outmatches the human race in every way.

there has to be Alien life out there right?

One could logically infer that there is life elsewhere in the universe, but I wouldn't go so far as to say it is a certainty. One would also have to consider that life might not always fall under our definition of life. Perhaps on Earth life follows certain rules and nothing exists outside those rules on Earth, but you can't discount the possibility that in different conditions that life might be very different and possibly more readily occurring. Of course, we don't know that, but the point I'm making is that everything on that topic, regardless of your worldview, is strictly speculation. I would even say that from a Christian perspective that alien life is a possibility, too.

If there are aliens there have to be aliens more intelligent and advanced than us.

Despite what Star Trek might have you believe, once again this is purely speculative. It also depends on your definition of "advanced." I mean, who is to say whether us harnessing space travel is more or less advanced than aliens can travel in space without machines? We might find that incredibly advanced, but for all we know their perspective might find that our computers and spaceships and weapons are more advanced than them.

Wouldn't they have found us by now with that kind of knowledge and understanding?

Once again, purely speculative. Even if there is a human-like race with knowledge and technology a hundred times more advanced than ours, how is it a definite possibility that they've found us? What if they live billions of light years away from us? You can speculate all you want, but presuming that aliens would have to have found us by now is kind of silly. What if they came here 3 billion years ago and found no intelligent life and just left?

but Atheism has already made it's mind up about a few things. (The fact that there can't be a God in whatever they discover) isn't it only a matter of time before these stepping stones present new laws and rules that need to be kept to that may obscure more possibilities?

You seem to be mixing atheism with science as if they are the same thing. I can tell you that they absolutely are not. While I agree that atheists have generally "made their mind up" that there is no God, could you not also say that theists have closed their minds to the possibility that there is no God? It cuts both ways in this case. On the other hand, most scientists (regardless of faith) will tell you that science is beyond the realm of religion, in the sense that no discovery will ever prove or disprove God. It simply isn't within the framework of science to be able to answer those questions of faith.

As far as stepping stones...Of course new laws and rules can obscure different possibilities. Our current laws and such really don't leave any room for flat-Earth Theory or alchemy. Is that a bad thing?

Thanks for explaining the idea of genetics to me. I have no gripes with that, but on the aliens being more "advanced" it just seems to me that the more intelligent a creature is the better equiped it is to survive. Especially with the chances of medicine and such to be created. So it seems to me the natural course of evolution would be to also evolve intelligence and self-awareness (which are the two things I do believe makes humans an improvement, but I get what you mean by that).

I didn't mean to make science and atheism sound like the same thing. Maybe I made it sound like that because I'm scientifically ignorant and just made a few wrong associations. But I do realise they're different, I've read this site for a while and seen a lot of religious and scientific users post. And on the stepping stones obscuring things towards religion, I wasn't just saying it happens for athiesm. I have plenty of questions for religion too (which is why I choose to represent myself as agnostic) but they're the common ones that I'm sure are asked here a lot. I thought my questions towards science were a little bit more unique than my ones on religion.

Beanybag wrote:Atheism isn't a belief, but a lack of a belief in any god. The new religion you might be thinking of is scientific naturalism, but it's more of an idealistic philosophy more than a religion, since there is no deities or rituals involved.

It seems to follow rules though (essentially "beliefs") and also I think early atheists mirror the horrible image that a lot of pro-atheists use against early christians (that's not calling atheists horrible or anything at all by the way). I.e. Believing their methods are flawless and unquestionable. Having a belief that they've answered all the important questions that need to be asked when it sort of seems like their core rules contradict that (the fact that we're a limited species who will just scrap this method for the next).

mickaneso wrote:I'm a bit on and off Christian which is why I go with Agnostic more.

OK...you don't know what a Christian is. By way of analogy, an American is someone who has an American passport or can get one. I may call myself an American, I may speak and write like an American, I may be able to fool many people into thinking I'm American, but I'm not an American because I can't get the passport with the eagle on it. So, you are a nominal Christian; you call yourself Christian but you have no saving faith. Please amend your profile as it is misleading.

mickaneso wrote: Aliens and Atheism have everything to do with each other. Think about it, Earth is a speck of dust in the grand scale of the universe. If it is the only place with life then that is an outstanding miracle beyond belief and that absolutely can not be coincidence or chance. Not those odds. Which would point to Intelligent Design. So if you are Atheist in my opinion you absolutely have to accept the fact that life exists elsewhere.

Sorry, but aliens and atheism have nothing to do one with the other. No self-respecting atheist would agree with your dogma that ''if you are Atheist...you absolutely have to accept the fact that life exists elsewhere.'' Sorry, but there is no ''fact'' about extraterrestrial life: none has been discovered; and even if it were to be discovered, it would be as irrelevent to atheism as to belief in God.

I think what you may be discussing is Fate vs Freedom or Necessity & Contingency ...no flying saucers are necessary.

FL

Beanybag wrote:Atheism isn't a belief, but a lack of a belief in any god. The new religion you might be thinking of is scientific naturalism, but it's more of an idealistic philosophy more than a religion, since there is no deities or rituals involved.

Atheism is a belief, it is a belief there is no God(s).

If you say it is a lack of belief you are just playing semantics, I could just as easily say I have a lack of belief in the non existence of the Christian God.

All this is, is word games and nothing more.

Every world view is a belief.

Dan

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

mickaneso wrote:I'm a bit on and off Christian which is why I go with Agnostic more.

OK...you don't know what a Christian is. By way of analogy, an American is someone who has an American passport or can get one. I may call myself an American, I may speak and write like an American, I may be able to fool many people into thinking I'm American, but I'm not an American because I can't get the passport with the eagle on it. So, you are a nominal Christian; you call yourself Christian but you have no saving faith. Please amend your profile as it is misleading.

mickaneso wrote: Aliens and Atheism have everything to do with each other. Think about it, Earth is a speck of dust in the grand scale of the universe. If it is the only place with life then that is an outstanding miracle beyond belief and that absolutely can not be coincidence or chance. Not those odds. Which would point to Intelligent Design. So if you are Atheist in my opinion you absolutely have to accept the fact that life exists elsewhere.

Sorry, but aliens and atheism have nothing to do one with the other. No self-respecting atheist would agree with your dogma that ''if you are Atheist...you absolutely have to accept the fact that life exists elsewhere.'' Sorry, but there is no ''fact'' about extraterrestrial life: none has been discovered; and even if it were to be discovered, it would be as irrelevent to atheism as to belief in God.

I think what you may be discussing is Fate vs Freedom or Necessity & Contingency ...no flying saucers are necessary.

FL

Man seriously what's your problem. I very clearly said I considered myself agnostic. I made my profile months ago, if you'll check I'm not a regular poster. People grow and their interpretations change, it's pure stubborness not to if that's what you're seeing at the time. I was Christian at the time, I've come back in hopes I can reaffirm my faith or get answers in the other direction like many others here I'm sure. I'm sorry that I'm not on hand to change every detail that makes you feel like you're getting a raw deal at your beck and call.

I changed my profile since you seem to have the fear that I'll be let into heaven because the only info God had on me was my profile on an internet forum. Selfish you.

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

Beanybag wrote:Atheism isn't a belief, but a lack of a belief in any god. The new religion you might be thinking of is scientific naturalism, but it's more of an idealistic philosophy more than a religion, since there is no deities or rituals involved.

Atheism is a belief, it is a belief there is no God(s).

If you say it is a lack of belief you are just playing semantics, I could just as easily say I have a lack of belief in the non existence of the Christian God.

All this is, is word games and nothing more.

Every world view is a belief.

Dan

Except when it's a lack of a belief.

Beanybag wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

Beanybag wrote:Atheism isn't a belief, but a lack of a belief in any god. The new religion you might be thinking of is scientific naturalism, but it's more of an idealistic philosophy more than a religion, since there is no deities or rituals involved.

Atheism is a belief, it is a belief there is no God(s).

If you say it is a lack of belief you are just playing semantics, I could just as easily say I have a lack of belief in the non existence of the Christian God.

All this is, is word games and nothing more.

Every world view is a belief.

Dan

Except when it's a lack of a belief.

Once again word games.


I can play them too... I have a lack of belief that the Christian God does not exist.

Ivellious wrote:You also need to take into account that we share many genes with different species that are not expressed. For instance, like all primates, humans have the genetic information that codes for a fully functional tail. Of course, those genes are "turned off" in humans so that we don't have a tail, but technically speaking those genes don't differ from those in a chimp by much at all.

Lol which gene is accidently being expressed here;
The 'human tail' causing tethered cervical cord
Abstract
Human tails continue to elicit curiosity till the present times. A unique case of human cervical dysraphism is described...
...A case of human tail at the neck region is presented...

http://www.nature.com/sc/journal/v45/n8 ... gure-title
(a, b) Clinical picture of the child's back of neck showing a hairy tail-like structure

Conclusion
Even in the present times, the world continues to witness grotesque forms of spinal dysraphic states. We believe that all forms of dorsal midline cutaneous stigmata should be investigated, however benign these may look. A tail may be a rare presentation of cervical dysraphic state and may cause tethered cord at that level. http://www.nature.com/sc/journal/v45/n8 ... 1988a.html

Will an evolutionist please cite which of our ancestors had a tail growing out of their neck since we are required by evolutionary thinking to infer that a gene for tails growing out of their necks is resurfacing based on the same observable evidence provided by the ones that occur in the lower back.

Talk about misleading, KBCid. That's not just an ancestral gene being expressed, that is a mutation of a gene being expressed. In no way is that some kind of long-lost feature of any primate. It's a deformity caused by a mutation...The article you posted was just a case study of an isolated time that this happened. However, there have been cases where the genes responsible for creating a tail in humans have been expressed; in these cases the extra tail is typically non-functional, because only a few of the genes needed to form a functional tail are being expressed (i.e. it is very unlikely that even one gene for a tail will be expressed in humans, and progressively less likely that two or more of them are expressed).

mickaneso wrote:
First Question
We're all in agreement that if Atheism is correct, there has to be Alien life out there right? I mean life is already a miracle, but with the sheer mass of the universe it'd be impossible for Earth to be the only planet inhabited with life. So for arguements sake there are "Aliens". I read that there is a 2% genetic difference between human beings and chimps. Now if such a slight change can be the drastic difference between building airports, sending rockets into space, being the dominant species on earth, creating art and literature (and well I don't need to go on about what we've achieve I'm sure) then perhaps another 2% might achieve things we can only dream about.

The Universe has been around a long time. If there are aliens there have to be aliens more intelligent and advanced than us. Not only that but the difference between us and chimps could be the difference between us and aliens times 100. We've already monitored a few planets and found no signs of life. Travelled to the moon and back. If there is alien life out there, far, far more intelligent than us then surely they would have means of monitoring hundreds and hundreds of planets near their home. You'd feel proud of a chimp painting a picture. What if every accomplishment we've had to date is only a pretty picture to this other race. Wouldn't they have found us by now with that kind of knowledge and understanding?

Also if the evolution of knowledge is boundless isn't it complete arrogance to think we've figured absolutely anything out really? In terms of the universe and creation especially. Do we think that in a million years the next dominant species beyond us will applaud and think "we're grateful that the mysterious origins of the universe were discovered in the year 2000 because it's left us with so much free time". My point with that is if history follows any sort of pattern at all in terms of science in 200 years won't they be looking back saying "look how far we've come, we didn't really know anything did we".

I have to concur with most of the other posters in noting that there is no reason why an atheist must believe in aliens. If, for example, it is as difficult for life to originate as some believe, the odds of life evolving even once in a universe of this size are very small. There are a lot of ways in which an atheist could attempt to account for life on Earth without believing it must have appeared elsewhere in the universe.

There is also little reason for atheists to believe that if life exists elsewhere in the universe it must a) exist in a form more intelligent than humans and b) be capable of discovering and contacting Earth. Even if alien life exists, there is no reason to assume that it must be more advanced than life on Earth, and even if it were, it is possible that it exists too far from Earth to make contact. It would be a mistake to assume, for instance, that there will always be room for better and faster travel or a better understanding of the way the universe works. It is quite possible (and very likely, actually) that the universe, as it exists, is unable to be fully understood by any living thing within it.

As for atheism as a religion, it is true that many atheists act rather like they are members of a religion (those that hold to a rigid scientism, logical positivism, or are merely New Atheists, which are so over represented on so much of the internet. Still, atheism itself is not a religion if it is merely the lack of belief (as Beany would put it) in God. (As an aside, I still don't quite get that. Beany, you claim to be an agnostic atheist, but the way you define it, there seems to be little to no difference between being an agnostic atheist and simply an agnostic. Obviously, an agnostic, being defined as one who doesn't know whether or not God exists, has a "lack of belief" in God already or else he/she would be a theist. What is the point of tagging "atheist" onto the end?)