This atheist, and scientist explains why he came to the realization why there has to be a loving God! [Spirituality & Religion]

Is this guy serious? He must understand that ‘fine-tuning’ isn’t very finely tuned after all. He’s actually just saying ‘if things weren’t like they are, then they would be different’.

Really? Wow, that’s about as deep and meaningful as a newspaper horoscope .

Worse, he talks as if the purpose of the universe is... us.

Anthropocentric hubris seems to know no bounds.

Then he tries to sell us Occam’s Razor (notice he’s uncomfortable with his own sophistry at that point). Why is his personal belief in a magical entity the simplest explanation? There’s no explanation of where the magical came from, the magical entity would have to be more complex than the universe it created, and if it existed outside of spacetime then it would be unable to have any effect whatsoever on that universe.

He wants us to think of that as the [i]simplest[/i] pseudo-explanation. Joke!

For the Big Bang he talks about 'something came out of nothing’. Nonsense. We know that something began to expand, thereby introducing spacetime (it’s therefore meaningless to talk about ‘before’ the Big Bang). He must be aware of this... I realise he’s not in any way a physicist, butt come on, he’s an educated adult, and this is basic stuff!

Putting aside his sophistry, most of this video consists of this chap taking about his own belief, spirituality, and such’.

Trivial pap.

I actually watched 10 minutes of it.
All I heard in those ten minutes was basically "faith" and "believe".
Then he started talking about making a [b]decision [/b]after realizing he didn't do enough research to [i]disprove [/i]God.
Yeah, terrible video, Carazaa. This man isn't convincing anyone lol.

lol i like this guy.

Buuut i'm not finding anything particularly compelling about his arguments. So yes, i'm absolutely still doubtful of the existence of the abrahamic god.
He uses the two arguments that almost every christian uses: an argument from personal incredulity and appeal to a fine tuned universe.

The fine tuned universe i feel can be very succinctly addressed by the puddle analogy:

A puddle wakes up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!'

So was the hole made for the puddle or did the puddle occupy the space that was available for it?

Another issue i have with his reasoning is that he acknowledges several naturalistic explanations for various things but then seems to reject them for reasons that he does not make clear.
He acknowledges that there are naturalistic explanations for how the universe could exist as it does. He says some of these explanations must necessarily be taken on faith. Ok. But he then goes on to declare that [i]his[/i] faith claim is actually the more likely for reasons that he does not specify.

He goes on to make some rather flawed arguments.
One of them is that evidence of a god who gave us morals can be found in the fact that humans are unique in our sense of right and wrong.
Well that's just false on its face.
The example which leaps to mind is the tests that researchers have done on monkeys. There was an experiment wherein the monkeys traded tokens or pebbles for food rewards. Initially they were given a cucumber (or some vegetable) in exchange for their token and they ate it quote happily. Then they started giving some monkeys fruit for their tokens, a much more valuable prize. The result? The monkeys who were still getting cucumber threw a fit. They refused to eat their cucumber and didn't participate in the exercise anymore.
They recognized that they were not being treated fairly in comparison to the monkeys who received fruit. What do we call that except an understanding of what is right and what is wrong? They found it unacceptable that they were not getting the same reward for the same payment.
So in fact, a sense of right and wrong is not uniquely human. Actually, the fact that this sense also appears to exist in animals which are judged by phylogeny to be closely related to us rather supports the conclusion that we evolved from a shared ancestor. Incidentally, Collins does believe in evolution.

Another example he gives that god must have had a hand in our being is the presence of what he calls extreme altruism: people risking life and limb for other people who they might not even know....but he previously acknowledges that there are evolutionary explanations for altruism. So if the tendency for altruism can easily be explained by evolution as a social animal, when then should we attribute it to the work of a supernatural designer? After all, instincts can often be expressed in unusual ways. Consider the example of a lioness who kept stealing antelope babies and mothering them. She had lost her cubs and her instinct to mother was transferred to another animal entirely.
So is it then any argument for god that altruism which, as Collins says, can readily be explain by an evolutionarily adaptive drive for reciprocal altruism or to preserve one's genes can be expressed for strangers?

Ultimately, my impression is that Collins came to believe because of a lack of information. Hence the argument from personal incredulity.

We must be concerned with what is true, wherever that investigation leads us.

Another note.

As any mathematician knows, Logic is formal.
What does it means? That can be used as well for existing, not existing, fictional entities or just empty symbols (p,q…).
In a more general way, Logic have not "ontological commitment".
As the Universe is not an abstraction…
As reified qualities Plato-like entities ("Redness, "Life") where never detected nor meassured…
Thus…
"Logical Necessity" (and "Logical Imposibility") are NOT scientific scientific criteria and neither can be causes.

It's half an hour long lmao. Provide a transcript or a summary.

He's saying that selflessness negates the evolutionary argument for self-preservation, therefore it must be a God-driven moral value, as demonstrated by Jesus dying on the cross for our sins.

That's a nice theory, but it does not disprove evolution, nor does it prove Jesus.

His speech caters to a Christian audience. Religion is a faith baed system, and this "scientist" is trying to offer proof. That's not scientific.

@hippyjoe1955 as I have told you many times (pay attention!) life is a self-sustaining chemical system capable of Darwinian evolution
To repeat my question - are you claiming that the simplest form of life is a cell?

Another small note.

Introducing to you a concept.
(You can use it with the "Fine Tunning" Argument, but think it, please, wider.)

The "destruction of Information" when considering a result.

- You observe that a result is "4".
- You have (not YET) knowledge on how "4" ressulted (such information is not "contained" in the ressult, but "destroyed").
- If you infer that 2+2=4, that´s right! But if you say that 4=2+2 (outside basic arithmetic) is WRONG.
- Also 3+1= 4.
- AND, beyond abstract school level Math, in the physical Universe 1+3=4 but, when the "path" matters (which happens in the natural world, Physics, Biology et al) 3+1, is not the same as 1+3. EVEN if both result in "4".

That, together with the concept of Information Destruction, gives a first glimpse to what means "path deppendent".

When someone looking at the "4" (the actual Universe) says, ok, THEN 2+2, is making nothing but a gess.
Do not call it Logic.
Do not call it Science.
Science do not jump to the 2+2.
Explores the causal material chain, the specific path taken for a result.

Not "rationallity" (where 2+2=4, right).
But what actually happened in material terms.

There will be more notes. Enough coffee provided.

Dr. Francis Collins is one of the greatest living Americans. He is the man who brought the Human Genome Project to completion, ahead of time and under budget, and who now directs the National Institutes of Health… I know Francis, too, from various public and private debates over religion. He has been kind enough to visit me in his own time and to discuss all sorts of novel treatments, only recently even imaginable, that might apply to my case. And let me put it this way: he hasn’t suggested prayer, and I in turn haven’t teased him about The Screwtape Letters. So those who want me to die in agony are really praying that the efforts of our most selfless Christian physician be thwarted. Who is Dr. Collins to interfere with the divine design? By a similar twist, those who want me to burn in hell are also mocking those kind religious folk who do not find me unsalvageably evil. I leave these paradoxes to those, friends and enemies, who still venerate the supernatural.

Christopher Hitchens

If the Universe created itself, there would not have been Perfect Order and Balance. The animals are perfectly crafted. So are the birds. They have been Hand Made to perfection! Only Allah can do that. Atheists will never understand that they are not gods. They always want to have a sense of control

But which god? This is always followed up with “the only god” or “one true god” granted monotheism is pretty hoky as every successful structure is done through the work of more than one living thing. From procreation to socializing any living thing doesn’t solely operate by itself.

Because people lived thousands of years before he was invented.

Ohhhhh….not again!
Francis Collins, I know who this guy is!.
Another scientists, a good one that, some day, began to talk about just philosophy. Too bad.

That's fine, so long as no one misrepresents what he believes.

He does NOT believe that religion should restrict what should be taught in the science classroom.

He does NOT believe in intelligent design.

He does NOT believe in young earth creationism.

There's not a lot of controversy in what he believes. He can support his positions with science and prefers to explain some of the universe's unanswerable questions with divine guidance.

I would say that most intellectually honest atheists could accept this. That doesn't mean we would agree.

I would love the opportunity to break bread with this guy. He's quite interesting.

OK, I watched it, but it didn't convince me. The universe is not finely tuned to suit human life, it's not only Christians that have a moral compass and can demonstrate altruism, it's not only Christians that have found peace and contentment. I know you will disagree with me, but that's fine. I just ask that you keep an open mind and accept that other people's opinions and beliefs are equally as valid as your own.

To begin with.

As all scientific researchers know, the Ockam Razor, is a "tip and trick", not a sooo bad one (cos Nature is parsimonious and so should us be).
But not a scientific criteria.
Read, please (historically documented), whith what was Willy of Ockham debating.

"Fine tunning" Argument is the glorification of a logical fallacy.
It a priori assumes that there is a Purpose (backwards causality) and intent to use it to prove...that there is an a priori Purpose. Petitio Principii.
Please note that causality do not "moves" backwards.

It also implies a bad (BAD) conception of what Randomness is, and a bad (BAD) knowledge of the use of probability.

If some explanation about this is needed, I´m available, while prepairing more coffee.

a 30 minute video ? are you serious ? noone is gonna watch that

There are a few people on here that come to mind... bet they wouldn’t even bother

You should read " The strange case of Francis Collins". Tells you a awful lot about the man.
He sued & guess What?
HE LOST!!!!

I believe in god

It's very cool how God works.
God is full of surprises!
Like, when God sent His Son / Himself [that's a mind bender right there!] fully man / fully God, to live with us, teach us, suffer and die for us! Who could have seen [i]that [/i]coming? [Other than prophets who themselves were told by God.]

God is the Master of surprises!

I read his book actually. And found it very interesting

I wàtched as much if this horseshit as I could bear. Im not a neurologist but the most charitable explanation for this dope is a stroke. This is less convincing than what I got out of a fortune cookie with last nights take-out.

Good video. Thank you for sharing it. Skeptic finds Truth. Amen. 👍 😀

I have no need to watch a video or anyone else to tell me if THE CREATOR is real or not. already kn he is 🙂

No one debating has had time to watch the video you don’t time to educate yourself before debating

But its 30 minutes, can you condense it down a little?

That's ok ma'ma. That whatever it(Emosur) is. chosen to insult everyone of us who kn what is real. And call us Retards. Which I personally find insulting. Not just bcuz of my faith in the Creator but also being on the spectrum having (Asd) I get called that often along with a lot of other bad names.. Just block him. God bless u.

LOL

newjaninev2 prove evolution is the cause of all we see or your claim will be filed under unnecessary fiction.

Why does dna look like a skull

Okay.