Big Bang Fine tuning

A Darwin snark for a new Nobelist

Spread the love
Jim Peebles 2010.jpg
Jim Peebles/Juan Diego Soler ( CC BY 2.0 )

Well, the Darwinists are not going into that good night gently. James Peebles got the prize because he, in the Wall Street Journal’s words, “developed precise models of cosmic creation, transforming cosmology ‘from speculation to science,’ ” which invited a critical response from a Darwin spear-carrier, Kevin Williamson, impaling himself on Mt. Improbable for no particular reason:

Williamson refers to Peebles, a Canadian by birth, and the pair of fellow physicists who shared the prize with him:

Goodness, look at that: a couple of dodgy Europeans and a @#$%&! immigrant at Princeton!

They probably don’t even buy into “intelligent design,” either.

Harrumph, etc.

Yet, insofar as Peebles’s work helped to strengthen the evidence for a cosmic beginning, it is actually part of the argument for intelligent design made by, among others, philosopher of science Stephen Meyer in his next book, The Return of the God Hypothesis. As Meyer and fellow ID proponents have pointed out, a starting point to physical existence, which is what the Big Bang represents, is among the most persuasive evidences against a materialist perspective on reality. Taken together with the remarkable fine-tuning data, it suggests a purposeful cause operating intelligently outside nature, responsible for creation. That is why materialists resisted it until the gathering evidence, developed in Peebles’s field, made it impossible them for to do so any longer.

David Klinghoffer, “Physics Nobel Prize Invites Snark from the Anti-ID Peanut Gallery” at Evolution News and Science Today

It takes no great familiarity with arguments around the Big Bang hypothesis to know that the chief reason it is widely hated is its theistic implications. And the main reason that fine-tuning of the universe is hated for its design implications. Many cosmologists would far rather see science through to its assisted suicide via claims about a multiverse than live with either.

But if one is just looking for something to be snarky about, it is best not to engage with any serious issues. In that case, puffing popular Darwinism at every opportunity is the best choice available. There’s sure no Nobel for that.

See also: The Big Bang: Put simply,the facts are wrong.

Kevin Williamson? Oh yes, here, from the files: “Rube-Bait” Kevin Williamson vs. David Klinghoffer, Round 3

Note: The Darwinian spear-carrier thing riffs off, yes, Berlinski.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

11 Replies to “A Darwin snark for a new Nobelist

  1. 1
    Seversky says:

    The Big Bang theory is “widely hated” and one of ” the most persuasive evidences against a materialist perspective on reality”? I’d say you were getting positively Trumpian in your self-serving hyperbole except you’d probably take it as a compliment.

  2. 2
    ronvanwegen says:

    From Seversky…
    “The Big Bang theory is “widely hated” and one of ” the most persuasive evidences against a materialist perspective on reality”? I’d say you were getting positively Trumpian in your self-serving hyperbole except you’d probably take it as a compliment.”

    Not an argument – just a pout.

  3. 3
    hazel says:

    I think that the idea that the big bang is “widely hated” is a completely unjustified canard. I wonder if anyone can show a current source of someone who hates the big bang theory?

  4. 4
    Ed George says:

    Hazel

    I think that the idea that the big bang is “widely hated” is a completely unjustified canard. I wonder if anyone can show a current source of someone who hates the big bang theory?

    Who doesn’t love Sheldon, Leonard, Penny and the rest of the nerd crew? 🙂

  5. 5
    Bob O'H says:

    Ed & Hazel – oooh, don’t get me started…

  6. 6
    ET says:

    If the big bang isn’t hated then why are materialists doing mental gymnastics to either A) try to explain it away or B) suggesting other scenarios?

  7. 7
    bornagain77 says:

    As to:

    Nobel Prize in Physics Awarded to Trio for Advances in Cosmology
    James Peebles, Michel Mayor and Didier Queloz were awarded the prize for work advancing knowledge of the Earth’s place in the universe
    Excerpt: The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, which chooses the Nobel laureates, awarded one half of this year’s physics prize to James Peebles at Princeton University “for theoretical discoveries in physical cosmology,” and the other half jointly to Michel Mayor and Didier Queloz at the University
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/nobel-prize-in-physics-awarded-to-u-s-swiss-scientists-11570528806?mod=hp_lead_pos8

    Mayor “on the sidelines of a conference” stated, “It’s completely crazy,” to believe that humans will migrate to other planets:

    Humans will not ‘migrate’ to other planets, Nobel winner says
    Excerpt: “If we are talking about exoplanets, things should be clear: we will not migrate there,” Mayor told AFP near Madrid on the sidelines of a conference when asked about the possibility of humans moving to other planets.
    “These planets are much, much too far away. Even in the very optimistic case of a livable planet that is not too far, say a few dozen light years, which is not a lot, it’s in the neighbourhood, the time to go there is considerable,” he added.
    “We are talking about hundreds of millions of days using the means we have available today. We must take care of our planet, it is very beautiful and still absolutely liveable.”
    The 77-year-old said he felt the need to “kill all the statements that say ‘OK, we will go to a liveable planet if one day life is not possible on earth’.”
    “It’s completely crazy,” he added.
    https://phys.org/news/2019-10-humans-migrate-planets-nobel-winner.html

    Insisting on sanity in science is sure fire way to ruffle even more atheistic feathers.

    As to this comment from the OP:

    Taken together with the remarkable fine-tuning data, it suggests a purposeful cause operating intelligently outside nature, responsible for creation.

    Another piece of evidence that strongly indicates that God created the universe, and the earth, is that anomalies in the CMBR are now found to line up with the earth and solar system:

    Cosmic Microwave Background Proves Intelligent Design (disproves Copernican principle) (clip of “The Principle”) – video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htV8WTyo4rw

    In other words, the “tiny temperature variations” in the CMBR, (from the large scale structures in the universe, to the earth and solar system themselves), reveal teleology, (i.e. a goal directed purpose, a plan, a reason), that specifically included the earth from the start. ,,, The earth, from what our best science can now tell us, is not some random cosmic fluke as atheists had presupposed.
    https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/the-ever-cycling-universe-cycles-back-to-town/#comment-682338

    Genesis 1:1
    In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

  8. 8
    Seversky says:

    Bob O’H@ 5

    Ed & Hazel – oooh, don’t get me started…

    Oh, go on, treat yourself!

  9. 9
    Seversky says:

    Bornagain77@ 7

    Mayor “on the sidelines of a conference” stated, “It’s completely crazy,” to believe that humans will migrate to other planets:

    “Space, the final frontier…”

    No, it’s not crazy, as any Trekkie will tell you, just highly impractical and impracticable at this time. We need EITHER new physics to make FTL travel possible and – more importantly – affordable OR generation ships on which people will be willing to live their whole lives between the stars OR vastly extended human lifespans so that long-term travel is not so much of an obstacle. All a long way off, I grant you, but not crazy.

  10. 10
    bornagain77 says:

    Seversky, perhaps you should reference someone besides “any Trekkie” to try to support your claim that it is ‘not crazy’?

    For instance, in support of the claim that it is ‘crazy’, I can reference the fact that no material object can travel the speed of light, much less travel faster than the speed of light, and that the milky way galaxy itself is on the order of at least 170,000 light-years, and possibly up to 200,000 light-years, across its diameter.

    The energy needed to accelerate a particle (with mass) becomes infinite at the speed of light,
    “By special relativity, the energy needed to accelerate a particle (with mass) grow super-quadratically when the speed is close to c, and is infinite when it is c.
    Since you can’t supply infinite energy to the particle, it is not possible to get (a particle with mass) to 100% c.”
    http://physics.stackexchange.c...../1558#1558
    http://physics.stackexchange.c...../1696#1696

    The Milky Way galaxy may be much bigger than we thought
    New research suggests our galactic home spans a distance of 200,000 light-years.
    Excerpt: The research, described May 7 in the journal “Astronomy & Astrophysics,” indicates that our spiral galaxy’s vast rotating disk of stars spans at least 170,000 light-years, and possibly up to 200,000 light-years.
    It’s hard to fathom just how far that is. If you could ride a light beam from one side of the disk to the other, it would take 200,000 years to span the distance. If you could drive across and averaged 60 miles an hour, it would take more than 2 trillion years. That’s about 150 times greater than the age of the universe, which is estimated to be about 13.8 billion years.
    https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/milky-way-galaxy-may-be-much-bigger-we-thought-ncna876966

    And that is just the basic physics, that does not even take into consideration the fact the space, and interstellar space in particular, are VERY inhospitable to life

    Space Radiation Devastated the Lives of Apollo Astronauts
    New research points to serious concerns about human survival during deep space travel.
    By Robin Seemangal • 07/28/16
    Excerpt: A startling new study has revealed that a troubling number of the lunar astronauts from NASA’s Apollo program are suffering high mortality rates due to heart disease. The cause? Exposure to high levels of deep space radiation during their trip to the Moon.
    https://observer.com/2016/07/space-radiation-devastated-the-lives-of-apollo-astronauts/

    NASA Twins Study results show how a year in space affects an astronaut’s DNA –
    APRIL 11, 2019
    Excerpt: By comparing blood samples from the twins before, during and after the mission, researchers found that Scott’s gene expression was exceedingly altered after spending a year in space, and that his DNA suffered “gross, large-scale damage,” probably as a result of radiation exposure.
    Scott’s body exhibited a sharp uptick in biological markers of inflammation, changes in eyeball shape and a glaring deterioration of cognitive function. But six months after his return to Earth, the experiment revealed no significant differences in the twins’ overall health.
    https://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-nasa-twins-study-dna-different-20190411-story.html

    Sun’s protective ‘bubble’ (heliosphere) is shrinking – October 20, 2008
    Excerpt: Dr Nathan Schwadron, co-investigator on the IBEX mission at Boston University, said: “The interstellar medium, which is part of the galaxy as a whole, is actually quite a harsh environment. There is a very high energy galactic radiation that is dangerous to living things.
    “Around 90 per cent of the galactic cosmic radiation is deflected by our heliosphere, so the boundary protects us from this harsh galactic environment.”
    The heliosphere is created by the solar wind, a combination of electrically charged particles and magnetic fields that emanate a more than a million miles an hour from the sun, meet the intergalactic gas that fills the gaps in space between solar systems.
    At the boundary where they meet a shock wave is formed that deflects interstellar radiation around the solar system as it travels through the galaxy.
    The scientists hope the IBEX mission will allow them to gain a better understanding of what happens at this boundary and help them predict what protection it will offer in the future.
    Without the heliosphere the harmful intergalactic cosmic radiation would make life on Earth almost impossible by destroying DNA and making the climate uninhabitable.
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/10/20/suns-protective-bubble-is-shrinking/

    Nor does it take into consideration the fact that, by any reasonable measure, there are no other habitable planets in the universe for humans to go to even if it were remotely feasible and/or reasonable to do so.

    Linked from Appendix C from Dr. Ross’s book, ‘Why the Universe Is the Way It Is’;
    Probability Estimates for the Features Required by Various Life Forms:
    Excerpt:
    Requirements to sustain bacteria for 90 days or less:
    Probability for occurrence of all 501 parameters approx. 10-614
    dependency factors estimate approx. 10^-303
    longevity requirements estimate approx. 10^22
    Probability for occurrence of all 501 parameters approx. 10^-333
    Maximum possible number of life support bodies in observable universe approx. 10^22
    Thus, less than 1 chance in 10^311 exists that even one such life-support body would occur anywhere in the universe without invoking divine miracles.

    Requirements to sustain unicellar life for three billion year:
    Probability for occurrence of all 676 parameters approx. 10^-859
    dependency factors estimate approx. 10^-303
    longevity requirements estimate approx. 10^22
    Probability for occurrence of all 676 parameters approx. 10^-578
    Maximum possible number of life support bodies in observable universe approx. 10^22
    Thus, less than 1 chance in 10^556 exists that even one such life-support body would occur anywhere in the universe without invoking divine miracle

    Requirements to sustain intelligent physical life:
    Probability for occurrence of all 816 parameters approx. 10^-1333
    dependency factors estimate approx. 10^-324
    longevity requirements estimate approx. 10^45
    Probability for occurrence of all 816 parameters approx. 10^-1054
    Maximum possible number of life support bodies in observable universe approx. 10^22
    Thus, less than 1 chance in 10^1032 exists that even one such life-support body would occur anywhere in the universe without invoking divine miracle
    http://d4bge0zxg5qba.cloudfron.....3_ver2.pdf

    (Our) Rare Solar System Gets Rarer – Hugh Ross – November 5, 2018
    Excerpt: Astronomers have detected and measured the mass and/or orbital features of 3,869 planets in 2,887 planetary systems beyond the solar system.1 This ranks as a staggering rate of discovery, given that the first confirmed detection of a planet orbiting another hydrogen-fusion-burning star was as recent as 1995.2 What do the characteristics of these systems reveal about potential habitability for advanced life?,,,
    How many of the known multiple-planet systems exhibit these life-essential features? The answer for the 638 known multi-planet exoplanetary systems is zero.13 How about the known exoplanetary systems where only one planet has been discovered? Of these 2,249 systems, they either lack a cold Jupiter closer than 14 times Earth’s distance from the Sun or the planet they contain possesses characteristics that would rule out the possible existence of another planet in the system capable of sustaining advanced life.
    The presumption back in 1995 was that astronomers would find many exoplanetary systems where the probability of advanced life possibly existing in that system would be greater than zero. More than twenty-three years later, with a database of 2,888 planetary systems and 3,877 planets, only one planetary system and only one planet possess the characteristics that the possible existence of advanced life needs. It requires little effort to discern the identity of that single planetary system and single planet.
    https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/todays-new-reason-to-believe/2018/11/05/rare-solar-system-gets-rarer

    Shoot, I can even throw in the Fermi paradox for good measure, i.e. if intelligent life is relatively abundant in the universe, as atheists presuppose, then where in blue blazes are all the aliens?

    “The Fermi paradox is a conflict between the argument that scale and probability seem to favor intelligent life being common in the universe, and the total lack of evidence of intelligent life having ever arisen anywhere other than on the Earth.”
    per wikipedia

    Thus Seversky, once again, you have nothing but imagination, (and the authority of “any Trekkie” 🙂 ), to back up your claim that space colonization is “not crazy”.

    Might I be so bold as to suggest to you that you referring to your imagination, and “any Trekkie”, is not the way for you to go about scientifically proving to me that your belief in interstellar travel is not delusional and/or crazy?

    Might I also be so bold as to suggest to you that you also look a little higher than interstellar space itself for life?

    Here is a humorous episode about a oh so ‘coincidental’ phone call at SETI with very interesting timing as to its occurrence

    Tyson: “Their (SETIs) goal is the ultimate prize in the life finding game. Someone out there we can talk to.”
    Shostak: “Nothing to do but sit here and wait for them to call.”
    (And exactly at that moment the phone rings right behind Shostak).
    Shostak: “And on cue they’ve called.”
    – quotes as stated at 11:22 minute mark – Where are the Aliens Origins Nova Neil Degrasse Tyson – video –
    https://youtu.be/t1ReViBCDOs?t=667

    As a Christian who has seen a few answered prayers during my life, I find it strange that the SETI (Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence) organization spends millions of dollars vainly searching for signs of extra-terrestrial life in this universe, when all anyone has to do to make solid contact with THE primary ‘extra-terrestrial intelligence’ of the entire universe is to pray with a sincere heart.
    God, who created heaven and earth, certainly does not hide from those who sincerely seek and/or need Him.

    Isaiah 45:18-19
    For thus says the Lord, who created the heavens, who is God, who formed the earth and made it, who established it, who did not create it in vain, who formed it to be inhabited: “I am the Lord, and there is no other. I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth; I did not say to the seed of Jacob, ‘seek me in vain’; I, the Lord speak righteousness, I declare things that are right.”

  11. 11
    Seversky says:

    Bornagain77@ 10

    For instance, in support of the claim that it is ‘crazy’, I can reference the fact that no material object can travel the speed of light, much less travel faster than the speed of light, and that the milky way galaxy itself is on the order of at least 170,000 light-years, and possibly up to 200,000 light-years, across its diameter.

    Yes, we all know. That’s why I pointed out we would need some new physics such as Alcubierre’s theoretical “warp drive” which would warp space in front of and behind a spaceship in such a way that it never exceeds the speed of light locally.

    And that is just the basic physics, that does not even take into consideration the fact the space, and interstellar space in particular, are VERY inhospitable to life

    Which raises the question of why your God would place the pinnacle of His creation in a Universe that is so inhospitable to it.

    Nor does it take into consideration the fact that, by any reasonable measure, there are no other habitable planets in the universe for humans to go to even if it were remotely feasible and/or reasonable to do so.

    We’ve discovered just over 4000 exoplanets so far and that’s just in a short time and in a relatively small region of space. Granted most of them are not suitable for life as we know it but in a Universe of this size it seems highly unlikely that Earth is the only planet capable of supporting life. It wouldn’t surprise me if we found there was life of some sort on Mars way back and who knows what might be floating around in that sub-surface ocean on Io.

    Shoot, I can even throw in the Fermi paradox for good measure, i.e. if intelligent life is relatively abundant in the universe, as atheists presuppose, then where in blue blazes are all the aliens?

    Here amongst us, disguised to look like us? Flying around in cloaked ships that are invisible to our sensors? It shouldn’t be too hard for a more advanced space-faring race that takes their Prime Directive more seriously than some Starfleet officers I could name. The Fermi Paradox is not a particularly impressive objection.

    Thus Seversky, once again, you have nothing but imagination, (and the authority of “any Trekkie” ???? ), to back up your claim that space colonization is “not crazy”.

    Of course it’s mostly imagination at the moment but we have to start somewhere. In fact, you could say that’s where most if not all of humanity’s great scientific advances have begun.

    As a Christian who has seen a few answered prayers during my life…

    Compared with how many unanswered prayers?

    God, who created heaven and earth, certainly does not hide from those who sincerely seek and/or need Him.

    To paraphrase Captain Kirk in the movie Star Trek V: The Final Frontier “What does God need with a prayer?” He is supposed to be omniscient, sees into each of our hearts, knows what we think before think it, knows what we need before we are aware of the need ourselves. So why do we need to pray?

Leave a Reply