Close

Not a member yet? Register now and get started.

lock and key

Sign in to your account.

Account Login

Forgot your password?

Newton, Einstein, The Multiverse, and Walking Fish

27 Dec Posted by in News | 2 comments
Newton, Einstein, The Multiverse, and Walking Fish
 

Over the past few weeks I’ve had a pair of creationists trolling my videos, spamming me with many comments and private messages filled with creationist and anti-evolutionist propaganda, in addition to quote-mining the irrelevant opinions of scientists and atheists alike, which they believe somehow demonstrates naturalism can only bring despair to “misguided” atheists.

These monotheists also declare evolution does not disprove God any more than gravity did for Newton or Einstein, and then they give a flurry of quotations attributed to Einstein in order to demonstrate his religiosity. This is a classic trick, quoting the personal beliefs of famous historical people, like the Founding Fathers of the United States or Isaac Newton, in order to lend support for God’s existence.

However, what these monotheist fail to realize is that “On the Origin of Species” was published 83 years AFTER the singing of the declaration of independence and 132 years after Isaac Newton Died. So what indication would there have been for anyone to hold a naturalistic view before the theory of evolution had even been proposed. No one doubts these were brilliant men, but that still does not make them immune to superstition nor does it justify their ignorance of scientific topics outside their respective fields of expertise.

Although we can only speculate as to their continued belief in the Ambrahamic God should they had been privy to a comprehensive explanation of Natural Selection, who is to say these men wouldn’t have become atheists after fully understanding evolution and how greatly it conflicts with the mythological creation found in the Bible Although these men believed in God, as did every other typical American and European of their day, Newton’s theological beliefs no more lend support for God’s existence than his beliefs about alchemy support the notion that lead can be turned into gold using a series of chemical reactions.

Newton had a passion for alchemy, writing over a million words on the subject, which the Royal Society deemed quote, “not fit to be printed”. In fact, after reviewing his work on alchemy scholar have conceded the inspiration for Newton’s laws of light and the theory of gravity was a byproduct of his alchemical research. However, you don’t hear Christians preaching about the finer points of Newton’s beliefs in alchemy, now do you?

On the other hand, Einstein was a deist who did not believe in a personal god that answers prayer. And despite all the quote-mining of these Christians in order to support their personal ideology, they fail to recognize the true  theological views of Einstein, whose distain for a personal god is ironically advance by the very Christians who are quoting him. Einstein said:

“The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible [is] a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this.” (Albert Einstein)

You know, with all the quote mining that is taking place on my channel I expect these Christians to have at least run across a few websites that display the reality of what Einstein believed. But this is a perfect example of how creationist will distort facts and bend the truth solely with the aim of justifying their religiously biased agenda. As a side note, you can read more quotes from Einstein on his theological views at positiveatheism.org.

Over and over again these Christians claim evolution does not disprove the existence of God . But even if we suppose God produced different species through the mechanism of Natural Selection, that still means God created species through a NATURAL process, not a SUPERnatural process. There are always natural explanations to natural phenomena. Planets orbit stars due to the natural force of gravity. Atoms can come together to form molecules due to the natural occurrence of covalent bonds. Populations of animals adapt to different environments and over great periods of time groups can accumulate so many genetic variations that they no longer resemble their parent animal, thus becoming different species. There are many more examples we can give, throughout every single scientific field of study, but the point is that all of the laws, forces, and mechanisms we observe in nature, occur naturally, they are not the products of magic.

However, when it comes to why physical forces such as the gravitational constant are they way they are, or where all the matter in the universe originally came from, or how the first life developed from non-living molecules, monotheists ultimately default to an explanation that IS the product of magic. Why if everything else in the Universe can be explained through natural means, would we then assume the biggest unknowns in science must have supernatural explanations?

I am sorry to burst your bubble, but despite what you might have seen on TV, magic does not actually exist. Even if God exists, the universe he created is a natural universe that has natural explanations for all known natural phenomena. We understand magnetic forces and the influence of the earth’s core on instruments such as compasses, how the collision of solar winds in the earth’s magnetosphere produces the aurora borealis, how the moon influences the rise and fall of tides, we understand wave-particle duality, we know why the sky is blue, what causes rainbows, lightening, tornados, ocean currents, snowflake formation, earthquakes, solar eclipses, radio active decay, the nitrogen cycle, photosynthesis, cellular respiration, and the explanations to a myriad of other natural phenomena that have been discovered through the labors of the time-tested science method.

Although we do not yet have the answers to how the Big Bang and abiogenesis occurred, the one thing we can be sure of is that these phenomena have natural explanations, because they occur within a natural universe. But whenever you try to explaining this to a monotheist they rail against any possibility the universe or first life could ever have a natural origin.

But interestingly, two hundred years ago these exact same Christians would be the ones claiming evil spirits are the ultimate source of all disease. When we lacked knowledge about the cause of sickness we took it on faith there must be a supernatural origin. However, now that science has exposed the truth, we would consider anyone to hold such beliefs to be profoundly ignorant.

And this is exactly what monotheists are doing with regard to the Big Bang and abiogenesis. Relatively very little is know the origins of time, space, and matter, as well as how the first life arose. But instead of accepting that we simply do not have all the facts to make an truly informed conclusion about these subjects, monotheists choose to default to the same old supernatural explanations of the unknown. It should be no surprise that as we continue to accumulate greater knowledge of the Universe and the origins of life the more our superstitions will become threatened, and right now monotheists are on the defensive, being increasingly backed into a corner from which they cannot escape.

If and when evidence is finally discovered that conclusively demonstrates how life arose from non-living molecules, or a grand unified theory for how space and time arose from natural conditions, monotheists will be off to find the next unexplainable phenomenon in which to inject their God of the Gaps. I have no doubt there will always be some unknowns in the Universe, but that does not mean there are no answers or that the answers are unknowable. However, if the name of God is only invoked to explain away the gaps in our knowledge, then we can be sure that God’s significance will be greatly diminishing over time, for our understanding of the Universe, and the development of tools that allows us to do so, shows no signs of relenting.

At this point in time neither I, nor any scientist, can say with 100% certainly how the universe came to exist. And anyone that claims to know this information is lying to you, and that goes for creationist Christians as well. Monotheists do not have some secrete, cosmic knowledge that non-believers do not possess. Indeed, Atheists and agonists are truly honest with regard to their level of knowledge, for they do not claim to have answers beyond what is currently known. Monotheists on the other hand are doing just the opposite.

Everyone has the right to speculate on the nature of the Universe, but when monotheists being to label their opinion as fact, that is point when a line must drawn in the sand and they are called out for spreading fallacious propaganda. Remember, I am only questioning the unknowable claims of monotheists, I am not questioning the existence God. Indeed the god of monotheism requires belief by faith alone, therefore as a rule he does not even provide any evidence of his existence for us question in the first place. If God does exist, then he created a natural universe that arose through natural means, just like all these other natural phenomena we observe that also arise through natural means. The reason monotheists cannot accept this is because it creates the conditions where a God need not exist in order for the universe to exist.

This is the same reason why many Christians have such a difficult time accepting evolution. They see all the facts of evolution spread out before them, but they cannot bring  themselves to accept it, lest they accept the possibility that God is not directly responsible for creating the vast diversity of life. This conflict is perfectly exemplified in comments of these same trolling Christians. They both vehemently claim evolution does not disprove God, but then doubt evolution even occurred, and try to invent some non-existent war with the EVILutionist scientific community.

“There is a war among evolutionists. Most evolutionists are Neo-Darwinian, believing in gradual change from one form of life to another, but a good growing minority of evolutionists believe in Punctuated Equilibrium which teaches life forms change suddenly from one from into another through massive random genetic mutations caused by massive radiation or vial invasion of cell nucleii. These new evolutionists believe this way is b/x they known that the fossil record is hotly disputed even among Neo-Darwinians. Imagine a fish with part fins, evolving into part feet. What survival benefit is there? The fish couldn’t use its fins or its feet, and there is no fossil showing  such a creature existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers. Both types of evolutionists cannot explain a gradualist origin for life, although both believe that life originated by chance.”

Alight, I am afraid I must concede this point. Maybe if the fossil record were complete I could provide some evidence of a fish that could walk on land, but since my claims are totally reliant on the fossil record, without these important fossils I have no ground upon which to stand on. In retrospect, it appears I and, every evolutionary scientists, owes Prodigalfather1 a huge apology. You’re right, the only place where these make-believe fish actually exist is on the back of our cars, what an extremely funny and astute observation you made there. You know, if we only had a complete fossil record I bet could have really put you in your place, but hey, you got me on this one! Oh wait…

Aside from the mudskipper, there are various species of fish that display hand-like appendages, such as the Australian spotted handfish. Instead of swimming this fish walks on the sea floor with its fins, which have been adapted into a structure that looks very similar to a hand, hence the name. There are also various aquatic salamanders, such as the Axolotl, which display rudimentary appendages. But most importantly, we find fossils of aquatic animals that display appendages with characteristics of both fins and feat, such as tiktaalik, as well as acanthostega, which I extensively discussed in episode seven of my series.

Although I am open to the possibility that a god could exist, if a deity is responsible for creating this universe then it works through natural means. Evolution doesn’t disprove God, it only demonstrates God works through natural processes, not magic. But creationists like Prodigalfather1 cannot stand this view, because it allows me to go one step further and cut out the middle man. I do not claim to posses secrete knowledge about the creation of the universe, creationists on the other hand do. Therefore, they are held accountable to these claims. It is not enough to say, God is responsible, and then fail to back it up with any evidence. That is no better than me claiming we live in a multiverse and the universe in which we find ourselves is just a soap bubble in a sea of ever-expanding universes. Yes, this hypothesis explains away the gaps in my knowledge, but I do not have evidence to back it up, therefore I cannot claim it as fact. And I certainly do go around ramming it down other people’s throats as if it were.

So where is the specific evidence of monotheists that demonstrate the God of Abraham is responsible for creating the universe? And the appearance of complexity and design within reality is not meet the criteria for evidence. I can just as easily pass off the fine-tuning of the universe on the multiverse hypothesis as well, claiming within an infinite number of alternate  universes, we just so happen to find ourselves in a universe and on a planet that is able to sustain life, because that is the only place where life will find itself. So again, where is the specific evidence that backs up theistic claims? And one final word of advice to the two creationists that have inspired this video.

Instead of plastering my comments section with the irrelevant opinions of English professors like CS Lewis and copying and pasting creationist propaganda from junk websites like answers in genesis, try doing some actual research. You could potentially save yourselves a lot of future embarrassment by making even the slightest attempt to brush up on your understanding of science before entering into a debate, because the animals you claim never even existed might actually still be a live.

 

WORKS CITED:

Discovering Religion: Ep 07 – Transitional Species

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpW7nQl3-D4

 

Einstein Quotes

http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/einstein.htm

 

Newton the Alchemist

http://www.alchemylab.com/isaac_newton.htm

 

Isaac Newton

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton#Optics

 

The Incredible Hulk

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0800080/

 

Australia Telescope Compact Array and surrounds

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsGJFlTFGhI

 

Ambystoma mexicanum axolotl aquarium

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7cxJY5gu-A

 

BBC Planet Earth – Ocean Deep

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_Earth_(TV_series)#11._.22Ocean_Deep.22

 

Chemical Bonds

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEFeLYWTKX0

 

Genesis (2004)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0287457/

 

Magic’s Biggest Secrets Finally Revealed Season 1 – Episode 13 Part 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAz79eZlaxI

 

Strange fish is walking on the bottom of the ocean

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQv7uIfMIqc

 

Simulation solar system

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9R5P9Y9gRYY

 

The Hubble Ultra Deep Field in 3D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAVjF_7ensg

 

The Violent End Stage of Star Formation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_nCIJnZDW8

 

The Way Of The Master Series – Season 1 – Episode 7 – Atheism

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7uA-P8TsPM

  1. AnnettNo Gravatar07-18-14

    I see a lot of interesting posts on your blog. You have
    to spend a lot of time writing, i know how to save you a lot of work, there is a tool that
    creates unique, google friendly articles in couple of minutes, just search in google
    - k2 unlimited content

  2. 95GlindaNo Gravatar08-11-17

    Hello admin, i must say you have very interesting content here.

    Your website can go viral. You need initial traffic boost only.

    How to get it? Search for; Mertiso’s tips go viral

Leave a Reply to 95Glinda