As a reader puts it: From anti-God hero to trans-racist zero… But the thing is, who cares about the American Humanist Association without people like Dawkins?
Egnor: [t]he logic pointing to God’s existence is overwhelmingly stronger than the evidence and logic supporting any other scientific theory in nature. Aquinas’s First Way proof of God’s existence, for example, has exactly the same structure as any other scientific theory. The empirical evidence is the presence of change in nature. Because infinite regress is logically impossible in an essentially ordered chain of changes, there must be a Prime Mover to begin the process and that is what we call God.
Logic and evidence both point to the existence of God, whatever atheists may think: Michael Egnor addresses three arguments in Steve Meyer’s new book, The Return of the God Hypothesis.
Who cares any more about the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster? (You can look that up on the internet if you are not sure what it means. On the other hand, maybe you needn’t bother.)
Meyer: I was not surprised to hear outspoken atheists or scientific materialists explaining why they doubted the existence of God. What shocked me was the persuasive talks by other leading scientists who thought that recent discoveries in their own fields had decidedly theistic implications.
In discussing implication logic and first duties, Wikipedia on ID came up yet again. The lead’s manifest failure to be responsibly objective, descending into slander from the outset, speaks volumes: Intelligent design (ID) is a pseudoscientific argument for the existence of God, presented by its proponents as “an evidence-based scientific theory about life’s origins”. Proponents Read More…
More scandalous still, Gödel was not a Darwinist: “I believe that mechanism in biology is a prejudice of our time which will be disproved.”
Michael Egnor: The fact that the universe is tuned — that is, the fact there is any consistency at all in the laws of physics — demonstrates God’s existence. This is Aquinas’ Fifth Way, which is the proof from design.
Apparently, claims of that sort are not working out. Could these people try common sense before they go over a cliff?
If this is the kind of thing you need in your life.
Via Wintery Knight who helpfully provides notes on this 2017 debate in Ireland.
He found fine-tuning of the universe a reasonable argument against his position. In the meantime, new atheism has become the godlessness that failed.
D’Souza: Here I refute Stephen Jay Gould’s argument that the pattern of evolution reveals no purpose or direction.
An “anti-God” stance is, in some ways, more complex and less satisfactory than a conventional “pro-God” stance.
Back to Georges Lemaitre, a Catholic priest: A CENTURY ago, if you asked a cosmologist the universe’s age, the answer may well have been “infinite”. It was a neat way to sidestep the question of how it formed, and the idea had been enshrined in 1917 when Albert Einstein presented his model of a static Read More…