Fine tuning specifics: Reasons for God (Introduction)

by David Turell , Friday, December 26, 2014, 18:33 (3620 days ago) @ David Turell

The number of parameters for life, including 200 just for Earth itself, preclude the probabilities of chance ever being the cause:-http://www.wsj.com/articles/eric-metaxas-science-increasingly-makes-the-case-for-god-1419544568-"Yet here we are, not only existing, but talking about existing. What can account for it? Can every one of those many parameters have been perfect by accident? At what point is it fair to admit that science suggests that we cannot be the result of random forces? Doesn't assuming that an intelligence created these perfect conditions require far less faith than believing that a life-sustaining Earth just happened to beat the inconceivable odds to come into being?"-Makes perfect sense to me. Anything else requires full faith in 'chance' alone. Fred Hoyle tried to be an atheist most of his life:-"Fred Hoyle, the astronomer who [jokingly] coined the term “big bang,” said that his atheism was “greatly shaken” at these developments. He later wrote that “a common-sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with the physics, as well as with chemistry and biology . . . . The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.”"-Theoretical physicist Paul Davies has said that “the appearance of design is overwhelming” and Oxford professor Dr. John Lennox has said “the more we get to know about our universe, the more the hypothesis that there is a Creator . . . gains in credibility as the best explanation of why we are here.”