How To Build A Cell

Since I was in the midst of writing a series about the non-fine tuning of the universe I decided to read a somewhat academic book from some advocates of fine tuning. Instead of the obvious apologetics of William Lane Craig and Dinesh D’Souza, I picked up a copy of Fitness Of The Cosmos For Life: Biochemistry And Fine-Tuning by John Barrow, Simon Conway Morris, Stephen Freeland and Charles Harper. The forward was written by George M. Whitesides who is a Chemistry professor at Harvard and that is the reason I am writing this.

More Fine Tuning Foolishness

Today I want to write about the ratio of electrons to protons in the universe and the expansion rate of the universe. The ratio of protons to electrons is a value that creationist/apologist (oddly an actual PhD in astronomy) Hugh Ross says that if it were smaller there would be to little chemical binding and if it were larger, electromagnetism would dominate gravity preventing star and galaxy formation (which he claims is impossible since electromagnetism is stronger than gravity by a factor of 10³⁷ which I showed to be false in  my last article which you can read here). The expansion rate of the universe is a favorite of both William Lane Craig and Dinesh D’Souza. Hugh Ross claims there could be no galaxy formation if this value were larger and if it were smaller the universe would collapse. Craig and D’Souza both used a quote from Stephen Hawking out of context and then they intentionally ignored his own explanation which appeared a mere seven pages later. The misused quote from A Brief History Of Time was

If the rate of expansion one second after the big bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, the universe would have re-collapsed before it ever reached its present size.

and the explanation they ignored that was written in the same book a mere seven pages later

The rate of expansion of the universe would automatically become very close to the critical rate determined the energy density of the universe. This could then explain why the rate of expansion is so very close to the critical rate, without having to assume that the initial rate of expansion was very carefully chosen.

It is clear neither value was fine tuned and I will attempt to explain after a little digression.

Fine Tuning Foolishness

I always have thought since I first heard the Kalam cosmological argument as it often is used along with the fine tuning argument that it just didn’t make much sense. Then again, I have never thought many purely deductive arguments made any particular sense. Considering that a major proponent of the KCA (Kalam cosmological argument), William Lane Craig (Read my article Deductive Idiot part 1 and part 2), I decided writing a series of articles addressing the fine tuning argument (rather the supposedly tuned constants which by no means are tuned) would be a very interesting endeavor. The reason I will not address the KCA in much detail is because no deductive argument can tell you anything that is not assumed in the premises. The KCA says

Everything that begins to exist has a cause.The universe began to exist. Therefore the universe has a cause.

To be honest the logic is sound but the conclusion is true only if the two premises are true. Does everything that exists have a cause? William Lane Craig nor any of the many others that use the KCA to “prove” god exists have apparently never cracked open a physics text for at least 50 years and I will give you an example showing that each premise is false.

Deductive Idiot Part 2

Not William Lane Craig

This morning I was listening to the debate between William Lane Craig [don’t lots of serial killers use three names?] and Bart D. Ehrman on the topic “Is There Historical Evidence For The Resurrection Of Jesus.” My opinion of Craig has not changed one bit. The part I really find interesting is that Craig has a Plantinigian view and does not think argument is necessary to have a justified belief in god so why is he so preoccupied with debating about god and Jesus?

Deductive Idiot

Not William Lane Craig

I had one of my commentators mention the debate between William Lane Craig and Victor J. Stenger that took place in the beautiful state of Hawaii. Being a good atheist with nothing to do on Good Friday thanks to almost everything shutting down by me because they commemorate the grisly murder of some Jewish guy, I decided to give a listen to the debate or rather the emotional idiocy of William Lane Craig and the debate of Victor Stenger.