Wednesday, January 25, 2012

God "Proofs" decimated: Part 1

You all know that I take a fair number of swipes at religion and religious belief on TFB - I'd say it's one of my core competencies. And you could hardly find a more deserving target. But there are times, like when I read about the way some freethinkers here in America and across the world are treated for expressing their (correct) views, that I feel like I don't go after it enough.I was gonna let this one go, but then I saw some of the repugnant reactions to the Jessica Ahlquist case (linked above) and got a bit feisty. Yeah, threatening a high school girl for standing up for her Constitutional rights - that's really brave and intelligent of you.

Thus, let's have some fun with a list of "50 Proofs for the Existence of God" that's made its way across the Interwebs and back. I realize this isn't a particularly strong set of pro-belief arguments, but then again, no arguments for the existence of a god or gods is even vaguely compelling, so these will do. As Ken Tremendous from FIRE JOE MORGAN once hilariously said, this isn't so much shooting fish in a barrel as it is "shooting fish in a barrel with a barrel-sized fish annihilation laser," but that's OK.

1.Whilst agreeing that random patterns occur naturally by chance, DNA however, consists of code, which requires a designer.
Just saying that a code requires a designer does not make it so. There's a tendency in the god community to conflate complexity and design, as if one necessarily implies the other. iPhones are designed and complex. Nike's swoosh is designed and simple. Dirt is not designed and simple. DNA is not designed and complex. "Irreducible Complexity" and its ilk are a group the pathetic arguments that intelligent design people use because they either can't or won't understand the gradual evolution of something like the eye.

2.How do you explain the paranormal, such as people witnessing positive or negative sightings, like ghosts or angels? I saw a ghost with a friend of mine - I am not a liar, an attention seeker. Neither was I overtired when this happened.
Awesome question! I explain the paranormal as follows: it does not exist. People witnessing ghosts and angels are imagining them. The human mind is extraordinarily adept at forming patterns where none exist. You're going to have to do better than citing your friends' hallucinations, I'm afraid.

3.Try praying. What good is it when a mind is set to coincidence & disbelief regarding the positive outcome?
Talking to oneself is not a proof of God's existence. As has been pointed out, the idea of a divine plan renders praying useless. If it's in god's plan, praying for something is redundant; if it's not, then praying is futile. I'm not sure I'm "set to coincidence and disbelief regarding a positive outcome" - some things come out good, some come out bad. Things tainted by religion tend to come out bad more often.

4.The law of cause & effect - in order to have an effect, there has to be a cause. Everything is caused by something.
I'm not sure this is a "law," but I understand the principle. What caused your god?

5.Mindless nothing cannot be responsible for complex something.
A baseless assertion, and a false one to boot. A raindrop falling is mindless but its splash pattern is complex.

6.Science can only be the detector of certain things. You cannot scientifically detect emotion, memory, thoughts etc., though scientifically we must.. These things which do not consist of matter are beyond the detection of science.
Neurologists across the world will be quite surprised to learn that they cannot detect memory and thoughts! Also, light does not consist of matter, and science can most certainly detect light. But inaccuracies aside, an inability to scientifically quantify certain aspects of the universe in no way implies a god. Defining a deity outside the boundaries of testable hypotheses may provide insulation from being disproven, but is supported by absolutely no facts.

7.Evolution has never been proved, which is why we call it the 'theory of evolution'. It's a fairy tale for grown ups!
This is an incredible amount of information to get wrong in such a small number of words. The theory of evolution has been confirmed over, and over, and over again through 150 years of rigorous testing. It is called the Theory of Evolution because a scientific theory is an explanation that ties together a large body of facts. This person only thinks that it's called a "theory" on account of lack of proof; in fact, he or she simply does not understand how the use of the word "theory" in science differs from its everyday use. Evolution is a fact. The part about the "fairy tale for grown ups" is quite possibly the quintessential instance of "pot calling the kettle black" I've ever seen. You think that a magical sky-god is going to grant you eternal life, while I understand and accept a thoroughly-researched mechanism that is the cornerstone of all modern biology, and I'm the one with the fairy tale?

8.Atheism is a faith in that which has not been proved. The disbelievers have not witnessed anything to not believe in, whereas the believers believe because they have witnessed. There is no 'good news' to preach in atheism.
Good god (pardon the phrase) is there a lot to correct here. First, Atheism is not a faith. I'll never understand why believers are so eager to drag me down to their level, to criticize my mode of thinking on the grounds that...it parallels their own? Second, Atheism does not need to be "proved." Believers are the ones making extraordinary claims about the world, thus the burden of proof lies with them. All the facts are on my side. Third, "witnessing" is a polite way to say "imagining" or "self-deluding." Fourth, there is plenty of "good news" to preach in Atheism. The world and universe are amazing. Our time here on Earth is short but unique and precious. You are free to do what you think is best to make the world a better place. You define your purpose. This realistic, uninsulated truth is so much better news than anything I've ever heard from a religion.

9.How much of the atheist's faith relies on anger with God as opposed to genuine disbelief in God?
Again, it's not faith, but the answer is: zero. I have zero anger with god because he does not exist. Thanks for asking.

10.Why do many atheists shake their fists & spend so much time ranting & raving about something they don't believe in? If they are no more than a fizzled out battery at the end of the day, then why don't they spend their lives partying, or getting a hobby?! Why don't they leave this 'God nonsense' alone?
The answer to the first question is because of how immersed we find ourself in religion. I live in a nation that is 85% Christian, one where Christian Privilege is so widespread that this author is blissfully unaware of it. Study after study finds that we are, bizarrely, America's Least Trusted Minority. These are the reasons we speak out.

And I do party, and I have many hobbies. I assign my life purpose, not the false purpose promulgated by religious faiths. I'll leave this "God nonsense" alone once it disappears forever into the dustbin of bad ideas.

11.What created God? What came first, the chicken or the egg? I am not going to deny the existence of the chicken or the egg, merely because I don't understand or know what came first. I don't care - they both exist!
Nothing, is the short answer to the first question, because God doesn't exist. Both chickens and eggs exist - hey, we agree on something! The comment about not denying something "merely because I don't understand" is comical in light of this individual's uninformed views on evolution.

12.Improbability is not the same as impossibility. You only have to look at life itself for that backup of proof.
This seems to support my view. The beginning of life on Earth and its resulting complexity are very improbable, yet they have happened, so they are by definition not impossible. This is a proof of God?

13.How could the complexity of human life possibly evolve on its own accord out of mindless cells?
Read a fucking book on evolution. Neurologists and biologists are working on the finer points of this very problem, rather than throwing up their hands and asking idiotic rhetorical questions. Evolution happens over millions of years - you must try to understand the grand time scales across which single-celled organisms evolved into creatures as complex as worms, let alone humans.

14.How could the complexity of the human mind possibly evolve on its own accord out of mindless cells? Where does our consciousness come from?
Didn't we just do this one? Were you struggling to get to 50?

15.What/who knew that our hunger & thirst had to be catered for by the food & drink which we're supplied with?
Um...because if there wasn't food energy and water available we wouldn't have evolved to require them? Was that supposed to be a trick question?

16.Most of us are born with the five senses to detect our surroundings, which we're provided with.
All five of which evolved over millions of years to better adapt us to our environment. Have you ever read about how the modern human eye evolved from crude photosensitive cells? It's fascinating.

17.What/who knew that had Earth been set nearer to the sun, we would burn up?
18.What/who knew that had Earth been set any further from the sun, we would freeze up?

The Earth has an elliptical orbit that varies by some five million kilometers over the course of a year. You are an idiot.

19.What/who knew that had Earth been built larger or smaller, its atmosphere would be one where it would not be possible for us to breathe?
The Earth wasn't "built," and there's no way this is true. Besides, at one point the Earth's atmosphere was indeed once such that we couldn't breathe, consisting of carbon dioxide and supporting only anaerobic organisms. Good times!

20.What/who knew that we require the oxygen of plants, just as plants require the carbon dioxide of us?
Biologists know/knew this. What is it that you want me to answer here?

21.The concept that life came about through sheer chance is as absurd & improbable as a tornado blowing through a junk yard, consequently assembling a Boeing 747!
Random probabilities aside, this was taken up quite adeptly by Richard Dawkins in The God Delusion. READ MORE.

22.We are willing to believe in physically unseen waves that exist through the air, operating physical forces & appliances to work, yet not supernatural God forces being responsible for the same.
That is correct - I couldn't have stated it more clearly. We can observe, quantify, generate, and control electromagnetic radiation. You're doing it right now with your eyes. We also understand how these particles/waves are generated. As Laplace observed long ago, there is need to append a god hypothesis onto it.

23.Matter cannot organise itself. An uneaten tomato will not progress on its own accord to form a perfect pineapple. It will transform into mould, into disorganisation. The laws of evolution fall flat.
Matter can and does organize itself all the time - look at a crystal or a snowflake. The tomato/pineapple thing makes no sense. I know this argument and I understand both entropy the Second Law of Thermodynamics, but the Earth is not a closed system, what with the Sun blasting us with photons and all. Evolution does not have laws, but its principles most certainly do not fall flat. Ever.

24.Our 'inventor' of evolution, Mr. Charles Darwin had this to say to Lady Hope when he was almost bedridden for 3 months before he died; "I was a young man with unfathomed ideas. I threw out queries, suggestions. wondering all the time over everything, and to my astonishment the ideas took like wildfire - people made a religion of them." Darwin then asked Lady Hope to speak to neighbours the next day. "What shall I speak about?" She asked. He replied; "Christ Jesus and his salvation. Is that not the best theme?"
The Lady Hope story is a complete fabrication. Next.

25.Where do our moral values held within our conscience come from? If the atheist is right, why then would we care about what we did?! If there is no God, then we've no-one to be accountable to.
Our moral values come from our minds. Mine do, anyway - I don't want to speak for you. Some people's come from ancient books of myth. I care about what we do because my mind is equipped with a conscience, with a sense of right and wrong, that guides my actions. We're accountable only to ourselves and others.

Click here for Part II

2 comments:

klatu said...

While awaiting the second part, there is a new player in the religious culture wars and the word 'proof' all of a sudden has teeth which the rest of theological history can't even dream about!

Proof of God, in the theological sense, is of course a misnomer, a philosophical contrivance to avoid accepting our ignorance of such a reality. As a humanity, we have all been conditioned, seduced or indoctrinated, for all of history by 'theological' exegesis, particularly those with their own religious claims and agendas, to accept that a literal proof of God is not possible for faith. And thus all discussion of morality and apologists 'theodicy' is contained within this self limiting intellectual paradigm and bubble of presumption, especially evident in the frictions between science and religion. It would now appear that all sides squabbling over the God question, religious, atheist and history itself have it wrong! That bubble could now burst at any time!

The first wholly new interpretation for two thousand years of the moral teachings of Christ is published on the web. Radically different from anything else we know of from history, this new teaching is predicated upon a precise and predefined and predictable experience and called 'the first Resurrection' in the sense that the Resurrection of Jesus was intended to demonstrate Gods' willingness to real Himself and intervene directly into the natural world for those obedient to His will. Thus a direct individual intervention into the natural world by omnipotent power to confirm divine will, command and covenant, "correcting human nature by a change in natural law, altering biology, consciousness and human ethical perception beyond all natural evolutionary boundaries." So like it or no, a new religious claim, testable by faith, meeting all Enlightenment criteria of evidence based causation and definitive proof now exists. Nothing short of a religious revolution is getting under way. More info at http://www.energon.org.uk
http://soulgineering.com/2011/05/22/the-final-freedoms/

Andy said...

Hi Klatu,

Thanks for the comment. There is no such thing as god.