Tuesday, 19 June 2007

God’s consciousness

The next chapter after God's Debris continues and expands on the idea in the last chapter.

Our existence was programmed into the universe from the beginning, guaranteed by the power of probability. The time and place of our existence were flexible, but the outcome was assured because sooner or later life would happen... You believe that DNA and probability are opposites. But both make specific things happen. DNA runs on a tighter schedule than probability, but in the long run—the extreme long run—probability is just as fixed and certain in its outcome. (page 51-52)

This implies that probability and DNA have a goal or outcome in mind and may even implie that the universe was designed. So this means that our understanding of probability is wrong as everything is certain in its outcome. This means that there really is no such thing as probability, luck or coincidence.

Just by coincidence this article came through my RSS reader this morning. It argues for the anthropic principle, which says that the universe was designed for life on our planet to occur. The article swings the Copernican revolution back to mankind as being the center or most important thing in the universe. The author (Hugh Ross) cites himself saying that there are over 150 finely-tuned conditions for life to occur and that the probability for them to occur is very, very small.

Both this chapter of God's Debris and the article linked above seem to agree that the odds for life to happen seem so improbable that it must be guided by some other force. God's Debris says that probability is guided by a god that is in everything but isn't too interested in humans, while the other article argues for the anthropic principle and the bible:

Of all the gods, forces, or principles that people have proposed throughout human history to explain the existence and operation of the universe, only the God of the Bible is consistent with the characteristics of the cause established in these space-time theorems. Only the Bible predicts and explains the anthropic principle.

1 comment:

  1. Not knowing who Hugh Ross is I did a bit of a search on him. Some people don't like his views. But those same people also disagree with the natural section process with some English moths in the 1890's where one colour survived over another. From my high school science class I always believed it to be true...