Is Creationism a Fairy Tale?

[TLK Valentine]

Yes ... I don't know of a single creationist (Jew, Christian, Muslim) that doesn't conflate God and creationism.

Not one.

But that doesn't make them interchangeable, does it?

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

So are they putting God on the same par as Humpty Dumpty in spite of their education?

Humpty Dumpty is a nursery rhyme not a fairy tale and who said anything about god?

 

[AV1611VET]

Humpty Dumpty is a nursery rhyme not a fairy tale and who said anything about god?

Nuts! I knew that!

Okay, Cinderella then.

 

[Strathos]

Do you think everyone here who accepts/argues in favor of evolution is a scientist?

 

[Delphiki]

So theoretically I shouldn't see anyone with an education referring to creationism as a fairy tale ... right?

Right. Because hyperbole, metaphor, and simply beng mistaken are strictly forbidden among educated people, as it clearly states in chapter 4 of the Atheist Conspiracy to Making Christianity Illegal rule book.

(that was sarcasm, by the way)

 

[AV1611VET]

Do you think everyone here who accepts/argues in favor of evolution is a scientist?

No.

I wish I could make a Johari window, but I can't; so I'll try to explain how I view scientists:

Picture a large square, broken down into four smaller ones by drawing a criss-cross inside it.

Outside the square, on the top, label the two vertical columns: INSPIRED and UNINSPIRED.

Outside the square, on the left side, label the two horizontal rows: TRAINED and UNTRAINED.

There you have it, four types of scientists:

1. Trained and inspired.
2. Trained but unspired.
3. Untrained but inspired.
4. Untrained and uninspired.

 

[nuttypiglet]

And in this finely tuned Universe for life to exist, Science overlooks that those laws were deliberately put into place. Rather than "oh look this attracts that" it should be marvelled at how many laws exist and are just right for life. This is the proof of a creator. Still, Science obviously feels embarrassed by this roadblock hence the invention of their new fairy tale "Multiverse". Science says "The problem with a God is that it introduces too much complexity and something which cannot be measured". I say "Multiverse introduces even MORE complexity than a Creator and still cannot be measured".

 

[AV1611VET]

And in this finely tuned Universe for life to exist, Science overlooks that those laws were deliberately put into place. Rather than "oh look this attracts that" it should be marvelled at how many laws exist and are just right for life. This is the proof of a creator. Still, Science obviously feels embarrassed by this roadblock hence the invention of their new fairy tale "Multiverse". Science says "The problem with a God is that it introduces too much complexity and something which cannot be measured". I say "Multiverse introduces even MORE complexity than a Creator and still cannot be measured".

 

[JWGU]

And in this finely tuned Universe for life to exist, Science overlooks that those laws were deliberately put into place. Rather than "oh look this attracts that" it should be marvelled at how many laws exist and are just right for life. This is the proof of a creator. Still, Science obviously feels embarrassed by this roadblock hence the invention of their new fairy tale "Multiverse". Science says "The problem with a God is that it introduces too much complexity and something which cannot be measured". I say "Multiverse introduces even MORE complexity than a Creator and still cannot be measured".

While I do believe that God created the universe, it is also the case that life could exist in quite radically different universes--the specialness of the rules in our own has been overstated. I recommend reading some science fiction novels by Greg Egan (The Clockwork Rocket, notably) as well as The Gods Themselves by Asimov for some examples of how life could arise in universes with radically different physical laws. Unfortunately, since most science fiction is simply fiction in space, there are not as many examples of such books as I would like.

 

[lasthero]

And in this finely tuned Universe for life to exist, Science overlooks that those laws were deliberately put into place. Rather than "oh look this attracts that" it should be marvelled at how many laws exist and are just right for life. This is the proof of a creator. Still, Science obviously feels embarrassed by this roadblock hence the invention of their new fairy tale "Multiverse". Science says "The problem with a God is that it introduces too much complexity and something which cannot be measured". I say "Multiverse introduces even MORE complexity than a Creator and still cannot be measured".

Exactly how many universes besides this one have you ever experienced?

Also, the problem with God, as far as science is concerned, is that he's completely unfalsifiable, by the very definition of what he is. It's not about how 'complex' he is or how 'measurable' he is.

 

[nuttypiglet]

obviously none, but Scientists maintain that they are probably there. They haven't seen any either. So what is the point you are trying to make?

 

[lasthero]

obviously none, but Scientists maintain that they are probably there. They haven't seen any either. So what is the point you are trying to make?

So when you talk about how fine-tuned the universe is, you're working with a sample set of exactly one. Just one universe. Only this one. Do you not see the problem with that?

 

[JWGU]

obviously none, but Scientists maintain that they are probably there. They haven't seen any either. So what is the point you are trying to make?

I wouldn't characterize the multiverse interpretation as the dominant one among actual physicists. More among popular science writers.

 

[lasthero]

I wouldn't characterize the multiverse interpretation as the dominant one among actual physicists. More among popular science writers.

And now comes the part where NP will claim that you're wrong, he's right, but provide no actual sources to support his assertion.

 

[nuttypiglet]

I wouldn't characterize the multiverse interpretation as the dominant one among actual physicists. More among popular science writers.

But isn't it the top experts in the field that are driving this theory?

 

[nuttypiglet]

And now comes the part where NP will claim that you're wrong, he's right, but provide no actual sources to support his assertion.

Is the Multiverse theory yet another topic you know nothing about?

 

[JWGU]

But isn't it the top experts in the field that are driving this theory?

No, I wouldn't say so, really. There's not much to "drive" anyway since it isn't a theory, just an interpretation. It's like Bayesianism vs. frequentism--both give the same results.

 

[nuttypiglet]

No, I wouldn't say so, really. There's not much to "drive" anyway since it isn't a theory, just an interpretation. It's like Bayesianism vs. frequentism--both give the same results.

The thing they never explain with this theory is where the energy comes from. Our Universe will eventually run out of energy, so I assume the pool of Universes will to. It also poses the same questions we have now, where did the pool come from, where did the energy come from.

 

[Oncedeceived]

So when you talk about how fine-tuned the universe is, you're working with a sample set of exactly one. Just one universe. Only this one. Do you not see the problem with that?

What exactly is the problem with that?

 

[JWGU]

The thing they never explain with this theory is where the energy comes from. Our Universe will eventually run out of energy, so I assume the pool of Universes will to. It also poses the same questions we have now, where did the pool come from, where did the energy come from.

Hm? Energy is a conserved quantity, there won't be more or less of it a hundred trillion years from now than there is today. I don't know enough about Big Bang cosmology to be able to accurately tell you "where the energy came from" but my gut suspicion would be that the energy was already there "before", or at least simultaneous to, the Big Bang (and consequently time). As far as pools go, I never said anything about pools or other universes.