Stephen Meyer: Fine-Tuning and the Origin of the Universe

Stephen Meyer: Fine-Tuning and the Origin of the Universe - Science Uprising Expert Interview

Рет қаралды 84,327

Күн бұрын

In this bonus interview footage from Science Uprising, philosopher of science Stephen Meyer provides an introduction to fine-tuning, the multiverse, the weak anthropic principle, quantum cosmology, and the origin of the universe. Be sure to visit scienceuprising.com/ to find more videos and explore related articles and books.
Stephen C. Meyer received his Ph.D. in the philosophy of science from the University of Cambridge. A former geophysicist and college professor, he now directs Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture. He has authored most recently the New York Times best seller Darwin’s Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design (HarperOne, 2013) as well as Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design (HarperOne, 2009), which was named a Book of the Year by the prestigious Times (of London) Literary Supplement in 2009. Subscribe to Dr. Meyer's KZfaq channel here: / drstephenmeyer
Check out our other videos:
Science Uprising Episode 1 - Reality: Real vs. Material
Has science proven we are all just matter? Or does reality extend beyond what we can see and touch? • Michael Egnor Demolish...
Unbelievable Myths Neil deGrasse Tyson and Co. Love to Tell
• Unbelievable Myths Nei...
About Science Uprising
Well-known scientists have been preaching a materialistic worldview rather than presenting the public with all the evidence. We are here to change that. The objective scientific evidence does not prove our universe is blind and purposeless. It does not show we are simply meat machines. It does not prove that evolutionary mechanisms can completely account for the diversity of life on earth. This is what THEY want you to think. Think for yourself and make an informed decision.
Visit the Science Uprising website at scienceuprising.com/ to find more videos and explore related articles and books. You can also find out more information about the people interviewed in this episode.
Check out other videos from the Science Uprising playlist:
• See more of Science Up...
Subscribe to our channel: / discoverysciencenews
============================
The Discovery Science News Channel is the official KZfaq channel of Discovery Institute's Center for Science & Culture. The CSC is the institutional hub for scientists, educators, and inquiring minds who think that nature supplies compelling evidence of intelligent design. The CSC supports research, sponsors educational programs, defends free speech, and produce articles, books, and multimedia content. For more information visit www.discovery.org/id/
www.evolutionnews.org/
www.intelligentdesign.org/
Follow us on Facebook and Twitter:
Twitter: @discoverycsc
Facebook: / discoverycsc
Visit other KZfaq channels connected to the Center for Science & Culture
Discovery Institute: / discoveryinstitute
Dr. Stephen C. Meyer: / drstephenmeyer
The Magician's Twin - CS Lewis & Evolution: / cslewisweb
Darwin's Heretic - Alfred Russel Wallce: / alfredrwallaceid

Пікірлер: 189

@cole141000 3 жыл бұрын

One of the strengths of Meyer is the precision of the language he uses. He's really good at conveying his points.

@mikebutler7605 3 жыл бұрын

I am constantly flabbergasted at the mind that sits within Stephen's head. Just the memory of so much information is foreign to me, let alone the ability to recall it and fit the pieces of information together in a coherent way. In a word, the man is brilliant and humble in the same breath.

@ChazMcMahon Жыл бұрын

He's the complete antithesis of the modern neodarwinist scientists.

@jean-marclamothe8859 2 жыл бұрын

I love this guy, so difficult to dismiss what he's saying. Creator and creation will always come together.

@andrewwatson9805 5 жыл бұрын

"It's like saying that the latitude and longitude lines on a map are responsible for the rise of the Himalayan Mountains..." Love it!

@sanjosemike3137 5 жыл бұрын

Even Christopher Hitchens admitted that "fine tuning" is the "best argument for the existence of God." Hitchens died before many of the design attributes were becoming more mainstream and disclosed. Even Dawkins has had problems with this and is a big proponent of the "multi-verse." He is even now facing difficulty with "problematic" questions from his University audiences. He had a stroke not too long ago. I assume he will state that THIS is the reason why he is no longer proselytizing atheism at colleges. Sanjosemike (no longer in Ca)

@eliasarches2575 5 жыл бұрын

I'm so excited for Stephen Meyer's new book! Stephen is, no doubt, one of the greatest intellectuals working today.

@turbohead971 5 жыл бұрын

Stephen Meyer is on his game.

@stevenwiederholt7000 4 жыл бұрын

(As Always, I...Could...Be...Wrong) It appears to me the more we learn about the Universe and Life the more reasonable Intelligent Design becomes.

@philippawesterman8843 5 жыл бұрын

Good to have someone credible who can explain things in common English. Thank you.

@petroniaskho 4 жыл бұрын

Insurance Agent: What caused this fire? Fire Chief: Oxygen. Insurance Agent: Where did the oxygen come from? Fire Chief: Don't ask those questions, you God freak.

@Amor-Fati. 4 жыл бұрын

Excellent...finally, I can feel confident in what I always questioned and now feel confident that the answers are what I had expected. Thank you

@robertmicelli2946 Жыл бұрын

Dr. Meyer is my hero. thank(the intelligent designer) God for men like him.

@marcusaurelius5652 4 жыл бұрын

Stephen, you’re brilliant! Now go get a camera stand.

@garycottreau8442 5 жыл бұрын

Cool. I see Hawkins and Sheldon Cooper lost it. Cheers. [ I knew all along]

@winstonowen2054 3 жыл бұрын

Brilliant stuff, Stephen. You speak to us as a philosopher and a scientist.

2 жыл бұрын

I simply love Stephen Meyer. Using scientific terms and explanations, he destroys the fundamentals of atheism and materialism so strongly that he leaves them no space to defend their stupid ideology.

@calonstanni 2 жыл бұрын

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

@greyideasthetheliopurodon4640 Жыл бұрын

Stephen Meyer never said anything about god, only a vauge “higher power” of some sort. A higher power doesn’t necessarily mean something is a god.

@davidrichmond21 Жыл бұрын

⁠Well he is demonstrating that a higher intelligence was behind the created of the Universe. This we can call God if we want to. We can deduce a lot through what he created. But since it is obvious that there is a God it is not where a Christian would like to start a discussion of faith. But because there is such a strong atheist presence in this world the Christian has no choice. If we are talking about evidence I would prefer to start with the evidence supporting the resurrection of Jesus from the dead.

@alexvargas5258 4 жыл бұрын

Amazing. I would like Stephen to have a debate with Sean Carroll about fine tuning

@scottdetter 4 жыл бұрын

Meyers Rocks!!

@adamfena6698 4 жыл бұрын

A FINELY FASHIONED WORK of ART NECESSITATES the ARTIST -Risale-i Nur Collection

@hism3rcy44 5 жыл бұрын

This is sensical, rational, sane and informative. Thank you for sharing this.

@davidanful 5 жыл бұрын

Awesome video !! Thanks so much for sharing

@bugatifans 5 жыл бұрын

thanks for this beautiful and useful video

@seddikmed411 2 жыл бұрын

At least the best explanation of the origin of universe and life on earth that I could even heard 🙂 Thanks God 🙏

@jordibassas1713 5 ай бұрын

The concept "fine tuning" recalls me my tunings of the "English by Radio course from the BBC when I waa a teeneger long time ago (now I am 84 years all). My radio device was an ancient one on which I were obliged to tune the station by short wave and the dificulties came precisely from the finesse of those tuning. My name is Jordi Bassas, and I live in Barcelona Spain,.

@thetruthchannel349 5 жыл бұрын

'the laws of physics alone can explain where the Universe came from' - Thats a remarkably dumb statement to come from someone as intelligent as Stephen Hawking. Its equally as ambiguous as the 'Natural Selection' abyss of Neo-Darwinism. It sounds like it means something but it really doesn't mean anything at all as far as a mechanism goes.

@jannyjt2034 Ай бұрын

You'd be surprised of how much ambiguous language is in science.

@ds525252 5 жыл бұрын

Zero comments? Over 6.5K views. Great points and the lat/long example was perfect! Thanks for this video.

@MrSpiritsurf 5 жыл бұрын

Awesome scientist! He really understands his stuff! No wonder he can present it effectively to ordinary folks like us.

@acortes7771 5 жыл бұрын

Vincent John, Dr. Stephen Meyer is not a scientist, he's a Philosopher of Science. Of course, understanding the science is vital in his field.

@ant1010 5 жыл бұрын

Great vid,thanks for posting. There was a big fanfare when the so called God particle the Higgs boson was finally identified by the LHC , what was less publicized was that a lot of particle physicists were a bit disappointed because it too appears to be fine tuned,its perfect value for the job it does cannot be explained by the standard model.and seems to be another lucky shot.

@johnnowakowski4062 5 жыл бұрын

I don't see why the notion of the "multiverse" would change the fine-tuning argument at all. It's just a matter of "scale". Let's just say that our solar system is like one "atom" within some "larger" system. Then we have to ask the question as to how "finely tuned" an atom needs to be in order to exist, which could be a "constant" all the way down the "tuning" chain from the macro to the micro...

@denvan3143 3 жыл бұрын

Fine-tuning is the smoking gun for Intelligent Design. The multi-verse is an attempt to turn the smoking gun into Russian roulette without any bullets.

@arkangelnorthman 4 жыл бұрын

THANKYOU!!

@sleepwalker7755 5 жыл бұрын

Thank you Stephen. This helps in debates.

@bapet5614 5 жыл бұрын

A designer must exist for a design to come out. I myself is a biology student and I can see how complex life is specifically the nucleotide sequence that any alteration will result to major changes of the entire organism. Common sense.

@vaishnavitiwari535 3 жыл бұрын

Amazing ... great explanation.... you're brilliant....Hari bol 🙏

@dbmail545 5 жыл бұрын

The weak anthropic principle is a tautology. The strong anthropic principle is equivalent to religious belief. A good resource is "Modern Physics, Ancient Faith" by Barr.

@gabrielfernandes5545 5 жыл бұрын

This was extremely remarkable, Dr.Meyer. There are, however, some proponents of the ID derivatives who defend a "young universe" theory, based on the alternative interpretation of the red shift in the galaxies and the unexpected abnormalities observed on it. Dr.Adauto Lourenço summarizes a few of the inconsistencies of the "Big-Bang interpretation" of this data: Many interconnected galaxies have different shifts (which would lead us to the weird conclusion that they have different speeds despite the connection), the quantization of the values of speed (the proportion values of the wavelengths always assuming multiples of the conjunct [0.06, 0.3, 0.6, 0.9, 1.4, 1.96], like if galaxies had "favorite speeds"). Some propositions were made in order to offer alternative explanations to the red-shift observed: Tired light mechanism (Zwick, 1929), the proportion to the universe's curvature (Segal, 1995), a shift on the speed of light itself (Troitskii, 1987). Also, the background radiation, other of the pillars underneath the Big Bang Theory, has received some divergent and not commented explanations (Like the thermic equilibrium of the cianide interstellar molecules or the result of the accumulation of thermic radiation out of the uprising entropy since the beginning of the universe). My point is: Even though the design is clearly necessary in order to sufficiently explain universe's tuning in a Big-Bang-originated scenario, have you personally considered the possibility of "getting rid" of the Big Bang? Do Hawking's theorems depend on the interpretation of galaxies' red-shift as an expansion of the Universe? Another question: isn't the Weak Anthropic Principle just a circular argument? Anyway, congratulations for all your work and knowledge. I am a med school student and also a researcher, and I've been struggling to teach on ID here in Brazil. It's been amazing, and I would really like to have some conversation with you, specially on the Cosmology topics. If you get interested, please email me on gabriel.jcd@hotmail.com. God bless you!

@ShadesofViolet8 5 жыл бұрын

Wow. ❤️

@Hollywood4Fun 3 жыл бұрын

The ending presents a humorous paradox by positing that a universe created by an unintelligent random quantum anomaly can only be suggested by administering the self-restricting boundaries of an equation produced with large sums of organized information. Thus, if information is necessary to create the explanation of how the universe came into existence, then information is also required in advance of the created universe. Subsequently, this information cannot be provided without a provider.

@beowulf.reborn 3 жыл бұрын

I need a 5+ hour lecture on this, that goes through all the "dials" in the fine-tuning argument, and then into the multiverse hypothesis and its problems in way more depth. And then perhaps finish it all off with a series of debates. XD

@ProfessorPicke 5 жыл бұрын

wow great video

@Roscoe0494 10 ай бұрын

I did not follow his last comments on the quantum problems but I have heard Lawrence Krauss discuss his something from nothing theories which get into how quantum fluctuations in space, essentially his version of nothing, create enough energy to ultimately create matter. And yes it raises a lot of questions including where the space came from in which these fluctuations took place.

@AndrewKnightMIT 6 ай бұрын

thanks Dr. Meyer!

@i0use0reason 4 жыл бұрын

Excellent

@cmhardin37 3 жыл бұрын

What if they are wrong and the tuning really doesn't have to be (and isn't) finely tuned? How certain are they that the universe is finely tuned?

@1RedneckCajun 11 ай бұрын

Whew, this is awesome.

@khurramhkhan 2 жыл бұрын

Brilliant

@eltonron1558 4 жыл бұрын

Another note for God living rent free in the head of the atheist. If they're up to speed, they will lose sleep.

@PInk77W1 5 жыл бұрын

The sun comes up on time everyday for billions of years. But materialist say there is no purpose to that. Yet if I crash into a police car at 7:30am 5 days in a row, I will be in trouble for doing it on PURPOSE

@arthurwieczorek4894 2 жыл бұрын

To say that the universe is fine tuned is to say that the universe could have been other than it is. On what basis do we make that assumption?

@MrFossil367ab45gfyth Жыл бұрын

True, whenever I talk to my dad about God sometimes we talk about arguments for God. Whenever we talk about "fine-tuning" he often says there is no way to know. There is no way to determine if it is or isn't. He said there is no way to gather data or go back in time. Then there aren't any other universes to observe "we don't know how to do so, or if a multiverse exists". If a multiverse exists though, how can we tell if all these other universes are "fine-tuned"?

@kenandzafic3948 Жыл бұрын

1. Based on two things. 2. The bounded principle of indifference says that if we have no reason to prefer some outcome over others then we should assign equal probability to all of them, in this case we have a huge landscape of possible constant values and since we have no reason to think that the other constants are impossible we assign them equally probability that makes our universe utterly improbable. 3. Even if we assume that, for example, these constant values are physically necessary, other values are still metaphysically possible, so that will move the fine-tuning by one nifo, that is, from the universe to the laws of physics, but the problem will still remain unsolved.

@cenewton3221 4 жыл бұрын

Wow.

@HappyBoyProductions 3 жыл бұрын

Love the video and information, but the cameraman needs some help keeping things steady..

@troycampbell7408 3 жыл бұрын

I’m reading Signature In The Cell, and Privileged Planet. Put together it’s just layers upon layers of improbability that we’re here. We are only here because God made us and loves us. He made us and then put us in the perfect spot to observe and learn from His creation.

@MrFossil367ab45gfyth Жыл бұрын

I watched the movie version of Privileged Planet. I would like to get the book some day, but I thought the movie was interesting. You should check it out if your interested.

@susanpepper148 5 жыл бұрын

If science continues to accidentally discover a designer and then creates more theories to refute it ... How in the world will they ever come to the knowledge of truth ? Its like playing monopoly and only one player being allowed to change the rules so that he wins every game. Does he really ever win ? He will never know unless he stops stacking the deck...

@michaelgonzalez9058 2 жыл бұрын

I used a tuning fork to see apply all tuning of body

@Pato-ot3hf 3 жыл бұрын

Some people just don't want the existence of a creator, no matter the cost. What is the problem of accepting that there could be something bigger than us?

@user-k229 5 жыл бұрын

Stephen, a mind blowing analysis of our Universe. Thanks for bringing the highest level of logic to the issue. The issue being that to negate a Creator, all that scientists are doing is compounding the obvious with even more improbable scenarios. By doing this they are making matters worse or furthernore, even more complicated. Why not just acknowledge that the Universe is so finely tuned that it is obvious there is some kind of Creator. Lets not debate what that Creator is, or what it looks like, because we can never comprehend It. I am reminded of verses from the Last Testament, the Quran: "We shall show them the Signs in the heavens, in the Earth and within themselves until it becomes manifest unto them that this is the Truth ( That there is only One Creator." "We (God) , has created the universe from NOTHING and it is We Who are expanding it." "We have created the Earth the Sun and the Stars each floating in space in an orbit." " We have created the Earth round like the shape of an ostrich egg." (how could anyone 1400yrs ago know that the Earth was the shape of an ostrich egg??).

@m.ssharma535 3 жыл бұрын

Minute 3.10 "speed of light not too fast not too slow" _ I thought speed of light is constant anywhere in the universe. Does he mean what it is constant but in a good way? not clear to me.

@markj.t.1633 5 жыл бұрын

Great video!

@mondopinion3777 3 жыл бұрын

I have a problem with the whole materialism/non-materialism thing. Water is 'material' but the amazing water experiments of Emoto and Benveniste prove it is highly responsive to consciousness, and also can conduct complex information across the passage of time. I don't think we yet understand what material is. Thingism might be a better term for the "dead stuff" view of the material world.

@apracity7672 4 жыл бұрын

Hey i would like to write a research paper, is it possible to cite the sources please:)

@think-islam-channel 3 жыл бұрын

Muslim here. Excellent video. Well done Stephen

@MrFossil367ab45gfyth Жыл бұрын

Whenever I talk to my dad about God sometimes we talk about arguments for God. Whenever we talk about "fine-tuning" he often says there is no way to know. There is no way to determine if it is or isn't. He said there is no way to gather data or go back in time. Then there aren't any other universes to observe "we don't know how to do so, or if a multiverse exists". If a multiverse exists though, how can we tell if all these other universes are "fine-tuned"?

@bobfree1226 5 жыл бұрын

Amazing deduction.God is Real.

@KenJackson_US 5 жыл бұрын

Excellent. The fine details of creation itself give glory to God!

@michaelgonzalez9058 2 жыл бұрын

There is only one space curvature at the warp because of being

@tv33BSN 7 ай бұрын

@TifleTifle-xd2pf Жыл бұрын

This was outstanding!! Don’t forget about Antony Flew. He died in 2010. During his time he was the worlds most prominent atheist, and he wrote numerous book. Then he became a deist. Not a Christian though, but a deist. What changed his mind? He said the discovery of fine tuning. But don’t tell anyone, the atheist hate the mention of his name. Shhhhhh.

@rizdekd3912 Жыл бұрын

Some may, but I don't think most atheist 'hate' the mention of his name. I sure don't. I just realize that despite how famous he was, he just hadn't thought it all the way through and had based his atheism on faulty reasoning. It would be how you might think of a person who claimed to be a Christian theist for many years but when some tragedy struck, they became an atheist. That would suggest to you that they had been basing their Christian theism on a twisted world view that maybe held God up as some sort of 'make everything all right all the time' magician. I had to think through fine tuning before I could conclude I no longer thought God was the best explanation for the world as I knew/know it.

@PeterParker-vi2nl 2 ай бұрын

⁠@@rizdekd3912I’m curious what convinced you otherwise? Or what was faulty in his reasoning? You give an example of how the “Christian” was at fault but not yours. (No offense, I know your comment says this was a year ago, but saying he “didn’t think it through” without explaining why seems arrogant). His research may have made him change his mind. He was drawn towards something, not pushed away from a “disingenuous” worldview or practice. The example you gave however is a very real thing. But the consistency there was a commitment to the self and not to God, even under the guise as a Christian (the Bible acknowledges this problem strongly). Regardless, I’m very much open and curious as to why you came to the conclusion you have about fine tuning (hopefully neither of us tune out change🙏🏻)

@gives_bad_advice 2 жыл бұрын

At 2:46 or so he says that list of conditions have to be just so "for life to exist." Obviously a fundamental error that undermines his thesis. He might be correct if he said "the particular kind of life that currently exists." For all he knows there are potentially a billion unimaginable other forms of life that could exists under a billion variations in conditions.

@kenandzafic3948 Жыл бұрын

This is one of the worst objections atheists can make because a universe that does not have these conditions will consist only of hydrogen so no form of complex life is possible.

@jimcolegrove5442 5 жыл бұрын

Creator, Father, singlarity, God Almighty whose name is Jehovah now has one more title (job title ?)

@namasi7070 3 жыл бұрын

John Lennox debunks the notion that laws can create in one of his debates

@mikhan5191 5 жыл бұрын

Very logical explanations.

@bobfree1226 5 жыл бұрын

Fred Hoyle coined that term Big Bang

@goliath257 5 жыл бұрын

Lovely 😊

@gersonfreiredeamorimfilho3012 3 жыл бұрын

👏👏👏

@drt5311 5 жыл бұрын

Materialist: There is no evidence of design in nature. Steven: Hold my beer.

@BradHolkesvig 5 жыл бұрын

Only our Creator can create all the visible illusions that created men believe are real.

@effectingcause5484 5 ай бұрын

Is Pi equal to 3.14 because of fine tuning or because of chance or because of necessity? Let's think... The number is incredibly precise in order to allow for the existence of circles. 3.141592653589793238 is to the 18th decimal and for example if that last 8 was off by just one point, let's say it was a 7, then no circles would be possible in the universe. Instead all "almost-circles" would just spiral inwards into a big crunch onto the center point. If that last 8 was too high, call it a 9, then all circles would spiral outwards to infinity and beyond! So now, should we consider this incredibly precise number we measure to be Pi as possibly a product of intentional design or a product of incredible odds? Is there a multiverse and we just happen to find ourselves in a rare universe where Pi just exactly equals 3.141592653589793238? Or, is Pi exactly equal to 3.141592653589793238 because that's how many times the diameter of a circle fits perfectly around the circumference of the same circle? Should this precision be fine tuned by an intelligent designer, or just by pure luck of the odds? Or is it in fact, because of necessity?

@zilefn9212 5 жыл бұрын

Stephen is very clever and very good, particularly at identifying flaws in materialist and other arguments critical of an ontology which includes a Creator. But there remains something deeply unsatisfying in a scientific sense in an explanation which posits such a Being, as that conclusion (a) leads to no further questions - it feels like an epistemological dead end; and (b) isn't falsifiable, which is itself profoundly contrary to the scientific method.

@LahSouljacutzup 3 жыл бұрын

Camera man is driving me nuts.

@DJTUNE1770 5 жыл бұрын

If everything has to be so fine tuned that the possibility of humans existing is very, very, very slim than there must be a creator.

@Mike__G Жыл бұрын

Why is the concept that metadata must always be more information rich than the structure of the data it describes so difficult for physicists to understand? The same must consequently be true of any “meta universe” or universe generator.

@Gatorbeaux 5 жыл бұрын

This absolutely proves Gods existence- as well as Intelligent design-

@juriggs 5 жыл бұрын

What are the three dozen parameters?

@peterjongsma2779 3 жыл бұрын

Steven says Fine Tuning. Materialists say Pure Coincidence. Materialists are INVINCIBLY IGNORANT.

@MikeFreesinger 5 жыл бұрын

Excuse my non specialist ignorance, are these fundamental "metaphysical" elements of philosophy? Ergo a Teleological Metaphysical argument?

@calebasomaning1428 Жыл бұрын

This guy really took his critical thinking assignments seriously 😂

@vincentrusso4332 10 ай бұрын

I reckon Professor Dave was smart enough to sit this one out..

@TheLamboman640 4 жыл бұрын

Putting what we already know into logical arguments from a scientific perspective. It is practically impossible for everything to exist without a creator. God is the only logical, reasonable answer, and the most probable.

@fabianfase7709 4 жыл бұрын

Well spoken. Terrible camera movement

@hasanshirazi9535 4 жыл бұрын

The hypothesis of infinite multiverses presupposes that Quantum Mechanics laws which are evident in our universe, in fact, transcend this universe and form the basis of all the infinite multiverses. The question which then arises is that if quantum states are the basis of existence of multiverses, then who created these quantum states in the first place and who bound all the multiverses to exist according to one of these states?

@Del-Martinez- 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you Lord for Stephen Meyer

@ca3ca377 4 жыл бұрын

the multiverse doesn't disprove that the multiverse is also designed.

@salomemalherbe677 2 жыл бұрын

Could Earth have Come "Down out of Heaven" like the New Jerusalem? Confirming the amazing INTIMACY between the Spiritual and Materialistic dimensions?

@TheShinedownfan21 3 жыл бұрын

We are fine tuned to fit this universe, not the other way around. It would be odd to find ourselves in a un8verse in which we could not exist. My cat thinks our house was "fine tuned" especially for him. People can come up with some tortured logic in an effort to prove their favorite religion.

@kevincolbert2472 5 жыл бұрын

Yes, we should be surprised to be alive if there were expert marksmen who all missed, but I'd be surprised to be dead if there were no marksmen and the theory for how I was to be executed was that marksmen would spontaneously appear and all have loaded accurate rifles trained at me.

@tedgrant2 3 жыл бұрын

Fine Tuning is the best evidence for the existence of God. Without it, I would have trouble believing that the Bible is all true. Take, for example the number pi, which has an infinite number of decimal places ! If pi was just a tiny bit bigger or smaller, circles would be impossible. Thank God for pi

@kristypickett4227 2 жыл бұрын

Look up Jason lisle fractals video too. It may be something like “seeing God in fractals” or something similar. Can’t remember the title exactly, but amazing

@doctorsfaithcorner4917 3 жыл бұрын

"Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and I separated them and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe? " The Quran - chapter21, verse: 30

@kenandzafic3948 Жыл бұрын

I hope you are not promoting the fairy tale that the Quran somehow spoke about modern scientific theories.

@brianclark2542 3 жыл бұрын

I really wish the atheists would change their story, again, when I went to school it was primordial soup, they don't talk about that anymore as it's chemical pathway is impossible, now it's thermal vents, so I guess their trying to say in each step of the sinthises the molecule would swim away or get closer to the vent depending on temp. That was needed for the reaction

@captivedesk3168 Ай бұрын

If the universe was different it would be different, thanks Capt Obvious.

@bonjourzere9358 3 жыл бұрын

If the universe didn't have the right conditions, we'd show up later in a different form. Why is it so hard to just admit we don't know the answers to things when there's no evidence?