5 ms·

Read more science books and then you can fully explain it! One of the best arguments that there is no God is exactly that beauty and complexity. It's only comp

Read more science books and then you can fully explain it! One of the best arguments that there is no God is exactly that beauty and complexity. It's only complex in a certain type of way, an evolutionary type of way. No animal has jet boots, or fusion power, or laser beam eyes, or the billions of really useful, but impossible/really, really hard to evolve features. There's no design. There's no plan. There's only evolution baby! You'll have to make do with some generalizations though, trying to go into the detail of every single thing is probably beyond what can be read in a single human's life time now. Bill Bryson's A Short History of Nearly Everything is pretty good start, or Unweaving the Rainbow by Richard Dawkins, which is a book about how science makes nature even more beautiful by explaining it, not less.

brink 6y ago
You're operating off of the false assumption that evolution contradicts the existence of a God.
- ashishmax31 6y ago
  Yes, but we already know about the rules which govern evolution, its the laws of physics.
  - brink 6y ago
    We have no idea where those come from either.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - tim333 6y ago
      Nah I think I've sussed it.
    - anthk 6y ago
      No, you have no idea if god exists to begin with. Thus, leave the phantasies out and stick to the real things we are proving today.
      - kaba0 6y ago
        First of all, I though we are past the time where attacking other’s beliefs is acceptable. Second, have you ever heard of this thing called philosophy? It is not useless to think about the word in an abstract way - without necessary relevance to the physical world. Like, what IS math? By the way, I do not approve of those believer that go against science, since I think belief and actual reality can go hand-in-hand, and even with God, or perhaps because of Him, one can appreciate the beauty of sciences.
        anthk 6y ago
        Beliefs do not reserve respect, at all. Just people do. I'll respect you, not your beliefs. >what IS math? Relations between proportions. There's no magic. Also, Science never can't go side by side with superstition. Ever.
        kaba0 6y ago
        You can’t really respect another person if you disrespect his/her religion.. Math is not that easy. How does something like eg. Group Theory fits into this “definition”? And yet, it is useful to the real world. Superstition is not religion.
        LocalH 6y ago
        I respect beliefs that aren't pushed on someone. For example, I have a working idea of the universe with regards to sprituality that involves neither science nor religion. I don't push that belief on others, I only offer it when my opinion is asked, and I discuss it with an open mind towards the idea that I might be completely wrong. That type of belief should absolutely be respected.
  - f6v 6y ago
    If we start from a primitive prokaryote, we pretty much nailed it. However, there's no experimentally verified theory of going from organic molecules to life.
- spacemark 6y ago
  It doesn't contradict all gods, but it does explicitly contradict most gods, or at least what most in the western world mean when they say "God."
  - f6v 6y ago
    To play the devil's advocate, suppose we show that organic life can spontaneously emerge from basic building blocks under certain conditions. Even then, there's a chance that those conditions were not present on Earth when life appeared here. It might be the case that a God had to artificially create them. And the first life was here billions of years ago, chances are we can't ever be sure.
  - brink 6y ago
    I'm Christian, and I believe in evolution, the big bang, old earth.. They're not contradictory. There are actually a lot of Christians who believe in those things. CS Lewis believed in an old earth while also believing in God. I usually try avoid religious debates on HN though.
    - spacemark 6y ago
      Belief has nothing to do with forming and testing hypotheses. You don't "believe" in evolution or the big bang or an old earth. Scientific inquiry 101. And sure, I get your overall point. I was Christian until age 26. I worked two years as a missionary in a foreign country, 90hr weeks, no pay, for my Christian beliefs. What "God" meant to everyone I encountered throughout that time, before, and after, is/was always a bit different. Ultimately we create our own personal God, and what that means can be compatible with honest and rigorous scientific inquiry. But you have to throw out large portions of the bible and accept that it's largely a work of art and useful fiction, and I will place $1000 down on a bet that the vast majority of "Christians" would bristle at such ideas. But yeah, best to stay away from discussions of religion with anyone except your closest friends. Even then it's usually ill advised unless you have hours to sift through the nuance and are very good communicators.
      - 6y ago
mooseburger 6y ago
Interestingly, no, it isn't fully explained as of today. Schopenhauer's quote of "Any foolish boy can stamp on a beetle, but all the professors in the world cannot make a beetle" is still true today. No, starting from beetle eggs does not count. They point is no one knows how to start from the inert chemicals that make up a beetle and cause them to assemble into a living beetle. More generally, abiogenesis has not been cracked.
- nojvek 6y ago
  There has been many many experiments where they take Stem Cell and replace the DNA, or change the DNA. Transgenic mice are the most studied. https://www.criver.com/products-services/research-models-services/genetically-engineered-model-services/transgenic-mouse-rat-model-creation/transgenic-mice?region=3601 https://www.criver.com/products-services/research-models-ser... There have been succesfull experiments with xeno-pregnancies aka interspecific pregnancy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interspecific_pregnancy#:~:text=Interspecific%20pregnancy%20(literally%20pregnancy%20between,another%20species%20than%20the%20carrier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interspecific_pregnancy#:~:tex.... With current technology, we very much do indeed experiment with DNA of animals. As for making DNA from raw materials, that is what DNA printers to. see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_gene_synthesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_gene_synthesis
- mattmanser 6y ago
  Perhaps, but we also know today that a God doesn't pull the Sun up every day, no Goddess blows on the Sea to make the tides, no God gets angry and explodes mountains, and there's no Goddess painting the ceiling of the world with stars. We do, however, know pretty much roughly how a beetle grows, how cells and DNA work, cell division, hell, even atoms, and their constituents. Even if we can't replicate it 100% yet. Is your God one of hundreds of thousands that have been forgotten? Or do you just happen to follow one of the modern trendy ones? Is it Thor? Athena? Xerxes? Why is yours so special compared to the 99,999 that have been discarded?
bromuro 6y ago
I don’t see how the existence of God should be denied by science. In a never ending effort, science will ultimately explain God. We all are able to take that little step inside our consciousness, trusting our innermost ancestral intuition and logic... to be grateful and humble in front of whatever is behind this universe.
- Koshkin 6y ago
  Je n'avais pas besoin de cette hypothèse-là. - Laplace.
- forgotmypw17 6y ago
  I agree, it's like a web page denying the existence of hardware
kaba0 6y ago
“The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you.” - Heisenberg It doesn’t matter whether I’m atheist or not, but to state that you can fully explain - well - any process of the universe is simply naive. There are areas we know many things about, but biology itself has an enormous amount of accidental complexity, (which is often brought up by atheists as a criticism of design) for example many many signal path ways that do fundamentally the same thing, but differently. Compared to that, spaghetti codes have good architecture. Whether God exists or not is imo orthogonal to the complexity of the world around us.

brink 6y ago

You're operating off of the false assumption that evolution contradicts the existence of a God.

ashishmax31 6y ago
Yes, but we already know about the rules which govern evolution, its the laws of physics.
- brink 6y ago
  We have no idea where those come from either.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - tim333 6y ago
    Nah I think I've sussed it.
  - anthk 6y ago
    No, you have no idea if god exists to begin with. Thus, leave the phantasies out and stick to the real things we are proving today.
    - kaba0 6y ago
      First of all, I though we are past the time where attacking other’s beliefs is acceptable. Second, have you ever heard of this thing called philosophy? It is not useless to think about the word in an abstract way - without necessary relevance to the physical world. Like, what IS math? By the way, I do not approve of those believer that go against science, since I think belief and actual reality can go hand-in-hand, and even with God, or perhaps because of Him, one can appreciate the beauty of sciences.
      - anthk 6y ago
        Beliefs do not reserve respect, at all. Just people do. I'll respect you, not your beliefs. >what IS math? Relations between proportions. There's no magic. Also, Science never can't go side by side with superstition. Ever.
        kaba0 6y ago
        You can’t really respect another person if you disrespect his/her religion.. Math is not that easy. How does something like eg. Group Theory fits into this “definition”? And yet, it is useful to the real world. Superstition is not religion.
        LocalH 6y ago
        I respect beliefs that aren't pushed on someone. For example, I have a working idea of the universe with regards to sprituality that involves neither science nor religion. I don't push that belief on others, I only offer it when my opinion is asked, and I discuss it with an open mind towards the idea that I might be completely wrong. That type of belief should absolutely be respected.
- f6v 6y ago
  If we start from a primitive prokaryote, we pretty much nailed it. However, there's no experimentally verified theory of going from organic molecules to life.
spacemark 6y ago
It doesn't contradict all gods, but it does explicitly contradict most gods, or at least what most in the western world mean when they say "God."
- f6v 6y ago
  To play the devil's advocate, suppose we show that organic life can spontaneously emerge from basic building blocks under certain conditions. Even then, there's a chance that those conditions were not present on Earth when life appeared here. It might be the case that a God had to artificially create them. And the first life was here billions of years ago, chances are we can't ever be sure.
- brink 6y ago
  I'm Christian, and I believe in evolution, the big bang, old earth.. They're not contradictory. There are actually a lot of Christians who believe in those things. CS Lewis believed in an old earth while also believing in God. I usually try avoid religious debates on HN though.
  - spacemark 6y ago
    Belief has nothing to do with forming and testing hypotheses. You don't "believe" in evolution or the big bang or an old earth. Scientific inquiry 101. And sure, I get your overall point. I was Christian until age 26. I worked two years as a missionary in a foreign country, 90hr weeks, no pay, for my Christian beliefs. What "God" meant to everyone I encountered throughout that time, before, and after, is/was always a bit different. Ultimately we create our own personal God, and what that means can be compatible with honest and rigorous scientific inquiry. But you have to throw out large portions of the bible and accept that it's largely a work of art and useful fiction, and I will place $1000 down on a bet that the vast majority of "Christians" would bristle at such ideas. But yeah, best to stay away from discussions of religion with anyone except your closest friends. Even then it's usually ill advised unless you have hours to sift through the nuance and are very good communicators.
    - 6y ago

mooseburger 6y ago

Interestingly, no, it isn't fully explained as of today. Schopenhauer's quote of "Any foolish boy can stamp on a beetle, but all the professors in the world cannot make a beetle" is still true today. No, starting from beetle eggs does not count. They point is no one knows how to start from the inert chemicals that make up a beetle and cause them to assemble into a living beetle. More generally, abiogenesis has not been cracked.

nojvek 6y ago
There has been many many experiments where they take Stem Cell and replace the DNA, or change the DNA. Transgenic mice are the most studied. https://www.criver.com/products-services/research-models-services/genetically-engineered-model-services/transgenic-mouse-rat-model-creation/transgenic-mice?region=3601 https://www.criver.com/products-services/research-models-ser... There have been succesfull experiments with xeno-pregnancies aka interspecific pregnancy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interspecific_pregnancy#:~:text=Interspecific%20pregnancy%20(literally%20pregnancy%20between,another%20species%20than%20the%20carrier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interspecific_pregnancy#:~:tex.... With current technology, we very much do indeed experiment with DNA of animals. As for making DNA from raw materials, that is what DNA printers to. see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_gene_synthesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_gene_synthesis
mattmanser 6y ago
Perhaps, but we also know today that a God doesn't pull the Sun up every day, no Goddess blows on the Sea to make the tides, no God gets angry and explodes mountains, and there's no Goddess painting the ceiling of the world with stars. We do, however, know pretty much roughly how a beetle grows, how cells and DNA work, cell division, hell, even atoms, and their constituents. Even if we can't replicate it 100% yet. Is your God one of hundreds of thousands that have been forgotten? Or do you just happen to follow one of the modern trendy ones? Is it Thor? Athena? Xerxes? Why is yours so special compared to the 99,999 that have been discarded?

bromuro 6y ago

I don’t see how the existence of God should be denied by science. In a never ending effort, science will ultimately explain God. We all are able to take that little step inside our consciousness, trusting our innermost ancestral intuition and logic... to be grateful and humble in front of whatever is behind this universe.

Koshkin 6y ago
Je n'avais pas besoin de cette hypothèse-là. - Laplace.
forgotmypw17 6y ago
I agree, it's like a web page denying the existence of hardware

kaba0 6y ago

“The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you.” - Heisenberg It doesn’t matter whether I’m atheist or not, but to state that you can fully explain - well - any process of the universe is simply naive. There are areas we know many things about, but biology itself has an enormous amount of accidental complexity, (which is often brought up by atheists as a criticism of design) for example many many signal path ways that do fundamentally the same thing, but differently. Compared to that, spaghetti codes have good architecture. Whether God exists or not is imo orthogonal to the complexity of the world around us.