If you’re like me, you get a kick out of reading articles by religious people who claim to have the perfectly crafted argument which will finally win us over to the side of superstitious nonsense. Barring the serious amount of head trauma needed for such a conversion, I read these articles because they’re a small window into the tortured logic of believers. Perhaps there’s a part of me still waiting for someone to actually come up with a compelling argument, just for the fun of having to think about it for a few days. So far, it’s nothing but disappointment.
One place where you won’t find any serious arguments whatsoever is News24, a South African online news resource that appears to have a resident Christian troll on the site named Charles Dumbwin. His latest genius musing is called The Deathblow to Atheism, a kind of ‘science can’t explain everything therefore God did it’ argument so poorly crated, it’s hilarious watching this train wreck:
Atheists believe that an unknown mass of approximately 10kg of floating nothing/something, suddenly exploded/expanded rapidly, and that same 10kg of nothing miraculously became the organised universe that we have today. Of course, they have to factor in a guesstimated 13 to 20 billion years in order for this absurd notion to sound plausible.
If you’re wondering where he got this ’10kg’ number from, you aren’t the only one. It would seem our friend here thinks the universe, when still only a singularity, had a mass of 3 human brains and was ‘floating around’ in space. There’s so much wrong here, it’s difficult where to start. The universe weighed 10kg? It was floating around? And this is what this clown thinks we believe. Yeah, I’d hit the science books a little harder if you’re trying to craft an argument, buddy. Of course, you could always try to argue from ignorance:
So okay then, let’s assume the latter, and let’s agree that the laws of science only applied to our universe instantly AFTER the Big Bang occurred. Would it be fair to say then, that no laws of science could ever be used to understand/measure what happened before the Big Bang? That’s fair right? Because we also know that scientists, cosmologists and astrophysicists the world over agree on this point; that trying to understand what happened prior to the Big Bang would just be mere speculation. We all accept that.
The laws of science? Science is a process, not a ‘thing’, man. Scientific ‘laws’ are simplifications of observed phenomenon that apply to specific relationships (like thermodynamics), and not divinely crafted rules for the universe. And while it’s true our current model of the Cosmos breaks down a few nanoseconds after the Big Bang, it certainly doesn’t mean that magic man is the fucking answer.
So if the laws of science cannot be used to measure/test/prove anything prior to the Big Bang, then it’s accurate to say that whatever/Whoever existed before the Big Bang, cannot be measured/found by using manmade physical instrumentation or through any scientific method.
Science isn’t only about making measurements, although that is an aspect of it. This guy seems to think because our instrumentation is physical that it cannot possible ‘measure’ (whatever that means) the Origin of the Universe. His conclusion, therefore, is to suggest his supernatural entity fits this particular description quite well. God in the gaps, anyone?
So what we are left with? Only more questions about our origins.
The only true moment of insight comes right near the end, although I doubt the author actually has any real questions about our origins. His religious stance informs me that he’s already chosen an answer despite the fact there is no compelling reason, outside of his own shocking ignorance, to believe what he does. Sad.