Yes, Dawkins sidekick Lawrence Krauss’s arguments are weak, but take heed…
|January 11, 2015||Posted by News under Culture, Intelligent Design, Naturalism, News|
It doesn’t matter (I’ll explain why below). First, here, Vince Torley mentions, among other things, exoplanet expert Daniel Bakken on Lawrence Krauss’s weak response to Eric Metaxas’s piece on fine tuning, worth quoting in detail and reading in full:
Krauss: My ASU colleague Paul Davies may have said that “the appearance of design is overwhelming,” but his statement should not be misinterpreted. The appearance of design of life on Earth is also overwhelming, but we now understand, thanks to Charles Darwin, that the appearance of design is not the same as design, it is in fact a remnant of the remarkable efficiency of natural selection.
Bakken: This is misdirection. We are trying to grapple with the question of this universe’s fine-tuning, and pointing to the design of biological systems doesn’t address the point at all. Davies made this statement in the context of the physical laws of the universe, and its life-allowing properties, so he isn’t being misinterpreted by Metaxas. Again, I am struck by the weakness of Dr. Krauss’s response here. He certainly is smart enough to know he isn’t answering the question posed by Metaxas, a question that is in Dr. Krauss’s own field of expertise. In fact, the design in biology, even if it is natural, only adds to the mystery of why the only universe we have direct knowledge of has the properties of fine-tuning that can allow these processes. Just saying we wouldn’t be here to notice it, as Dr. Krauss implies, isn’t an answer either.
Even beyond that is the uniqueness of the Earth when comparing it to the many other planetary systems that are being discovered. It takes an impressively stable climate over billions of years, all the while protected from gravitational and life-extinguishing radiation disturbances, to make our home what it is. The solar system, the Sun, the other planets’ orbits and characteristics, the moon, even our galaxy and our place in it — all these contribute to what is seen by a growing number of researchers in the field as pointing to the fact that the Earth is not an average planet, but an incredibly special one. More.
Take heed because it actually doesn’t matter whether his arguments are good or not. The naturalist believes in nature and nothing else. The Islamist believes in Allah and nothing else. Evidence is a threat to both positions because it may or may not support one’s dogma. (Life is often a threat to blind dogma.)
In the growing conflict between naturalism and Islamic terror, many will listen to Krauss and heave a sigh of relief—even if his arguments are senseless and heedless of fact.
The pressure on those of us who use our freedom to look at the evidence honestly, as Vince Torley does, will only increase in the years ahead.
See also: Don’t let Mars fool you. Those exoplanets teem with life!
Origin of life: Could it all have come together in one very special place?
Also, here is some sense of Krauss: William Lane Craig is “disingenuous,” and he “shocked” Larry Krauss in a recent debate? If Craig really and truly shocked Krauss, of all people, the hydro company should hire Craig to bring down the utility rates.
Follow UD News at Twitter!