Has Science
Found God?
Vic Stenger
New “Scientific” Claims (I)
Creation a miracle:
Laws of physics violated at creation.
Anthropic Coincidences:
The laws and constants of nature are so fine tuned for the
production of life to be highly improbable by natural
means.
Intelligent Design:
Biological complexity cannot be generated solely by
natural processes.
New “Scientific” Claims (II)
Benefits of Religion:
Experimental evidence for connection between
religious behavior and health and that prayer
works.
Evidence for Supernatural:
Experimental verification of supernatural powers of
the mind. Supported theoretically by quantum
mechanics.
First Law of Thermodynamics
Argument:
Where
did the energy
and mass of the universe
come from?
The
first law of
thermodynamics
(conservation of energy)
must have been violated
at the creation.
Refutation:
The positive energy of the
universe is exactly
balanced by negative
gravitational potential
energy.
E = K + Mc2 - Vg = 0
No energy required to
produce the universe
Second Law of
Thermodynamics
Argument:
Where
did the order of
the universe come from?
The
second law of
thermodynamics must
have been violated at the
creation.
Refutation:
Expanding universe allows
increasing room for order
to form.
Maximum
Entropy
Entropy max at origin
Entropy
Time
Arguments from Design
Basic Argument From Design
Claim:
“I cannot see how the complexity of the universe,
especially life, can arise by purely natural processes.
Therefore it must have arisen by supernatural
processes.”
Refutation:
Does not logically follow. Argument from ignorance.
God of the Gaps
The Fine Tuning Argument
Claim :
The physics of our universe is
fine tuned for our kind of life.
Thus the universe shows
evidence for intelligent
design.
Refutation:
Some kind of life could exist
with different physics.
QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.
Could There Be Multiple Universes?
Yes.

Nothing we know from physics and cosmology
rules out the existence of multiple universes.

Multiple universes trivially solve the fine tuning
problem. We simply evolved in the universe suited
for us.
Our universe is not fine tuned to us. We are fine
tuned to our universe.
The Evolution of Creationism (I)

1920s. Teaching evolution a crime in 3
states.

1925. Scopes “Monkey Trial.”

1960s. Supreme Court tosses out
Arkansas law.

1961. Rise of “Creation Science”
The Evolution of Creationism (II)

1970s. Laws in 3 states mandate
teaching Creation Science.

1987. Supreme Court rules them
unconstitutional.

1990s. Failed attempts to teach
Intelligent Design in name of
“fairness.”

Current: Teach phony “evidence
against evolution” in name of
“critical thinking.”
Intelligent Design Creationism
Claim:
Biological structures exist that are too complex to
have been produced by
Chance or Natural Selection
It follows that they were “intelligently designed.”
Intelligent Design Creationism
Refutation:
Evolution works by
Chance and Natural Selection
Intelligent design creationism is pseudoscience.
Example of ID Pseudoscience
William Dembski: Natural causes are incapable of
generating information. “Law of conservation of
information.”
Provably Wrong
Information gain is equivalent to loss of entropy.
Entropy is not a conserved quantity like energy:
Second law of thermodynamics
Arguments from Improbability
Claim:
The universe and life are
too improbable to be
natural.
Arguments from Improbability
Refutation:
Must
compare probabilities.
What
is probability that the
universe and life are
supernatural?
Low
probability events happen
every day.
What is the probability that
William Dembski exists?
Natural Complexity
Complexity is
generated naturally
all the time
Snowflakes and other
crystals
Ferromagnets
Polarized light
Evolution!
The Wedge Strategy of the
Discovery Institute
“To defeat scientific materialism and its destructive
moral, cultural and political legacies.
To replace materialistic explanations with the theistic
understanding that nature and human beings are
created by God.
To see intelligent design theory as the dominant
perspective in science.”
Intelligent Design Creationism is pseudoscience
motivated by purely sectarian goals.
Is Religion Good For You?
Claim:
Refutation:
Hundreds of published
studies claim connection
between religious behavior,
especially church-going and
health.
Many
sick people can’t
go to church.
Correlation
does not
imply connection
Natural
explanations
Prayers and Miracles
Claim:
Some scientific studies report
benefits of prayer.
Prayers and Miracles
Refutation:
No published positive results are significant.
Best study by Mayo Clinic. Negative.
“Intercessory prayer had no significant effect on
specifically defined medical outcomes, regardless
of risk status.”
Special Powers of the Mind?
Claim:
ESP and other paranormal
phenomena exist and are
supported by quantum mechanics.
Refutation:
150 years if study have found no
significant evidence. Quantum
mechanics is widely
misinterpreted.
Summary (I)

No laws of physics were violated at the origin of our
universe.

No observations in science require the hypothesis of
God or the supernatural.

The laws and constants of nature are not so fine tuned
for the production of life of some kind to be impossible
by natural means.

Biological complexity can be generated by solely
natural processes.
Summary (II)

Even if a connection between religious behavior and
health existed, it could be natural.

No experimental evidence exists that prayer or other
supernatural healing method works.

No experimental verification of paranormal powers of
the mind has been found. Not supported theoretically by
quantum mechanics.
Current science cannot be used to support belief.