Of Evolution, The Big Bang, And Star Trek (Part 1)

Part one of two!

Background music by Jonathan Coulton

Part two coming soon!

Transcript:

Of Evolution, The Big Bang, And Star Trek: Why Creationism Is Unnecessary

The majority of the "refutation" of scientific argument that comes from religious fundamentalists is based on ignorance and the misrepresentation of the science they are attacking.

Now, whether these people are genuinely ignorant, or they are intentionally misrepresenting the science in order to set up straw men to attack is irrelevant - the result is the same; the argument made against the science is based on a faulty premise which is then easy to refute, but not truly the position they claim to be arguing against. Let's take, for example, evolution. I once heard a comedian tell a "joke" that went like this: "If man evolved from apes, why do we still have apes?"

Now, clearly, to any scientist, any student of science, and indeed anyone who understands even the fundamental workings of evolution and natural selection, this is funny, but only because it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. In order for this "joke" to be funny in the sense it was intended, it requires the listener to actually believe that evolution refers to a magical event that causes species to spontaneously transform into a completely different species. It is indeed difficult to believe that there are people on this earth, especially in first world countries where education should be a universal right, that there are people who actually believe this. But believe it they do, or at least they want other people to believe it, so they will then buy the mystical alternative that these charlatans are selling.

It's very strange for atheists and scientists - even religious scientists, to comprehend this level of ignorance, but it is very real, and very frightening. This is why we must work hard to ensure that proper science is being taught to all children. No child should be forced to BELIEVE anything they are taught - indeed, science should teach skepticism and independent thought - and I include religion in this, but I digress. No child should be forced to BELIEVE in evolution, but we should at least do them the favour of teaching them science so they can decide for themselves what they believe.

Of course, evolution does not consist of creatures changing in a puff of smoke, we have observed evolution happening in our lifetimes within germ cultures, mayflies and other short lived forms of life - evolution, of course, moves within generations, not days, months, years, decades, or any other set measurement of time. Time is meaningless to evolution, evolution only cares about generations, because it is the steady processes of mutation and natural selection that govern how species change. We know that evolution can occur and favour certain mutations, and then these favourable mutations can lead species down separate evolutionary paths, causing schisms or "branches in the evolutionary tree" - this does not necessitate that ancestor life forms die out. We have species living on this earth today, such as certain strands of cyanobacteria, that have remained virtually unchanged for billions of years. But just because life has come a long way since single celled organisms, that doesn't mean we shouldn't still have them - when a new branch in the evolutionary tree springs up, it doesn't require that the branch it shot off from dies out. That does happen sometimes, but it is by no means necessary!

As far as the Big Bang goes... the "argument" I hear quite consistently from religious people is "Well, if you are going to believe that the universe was just created out of nothing, why not believe it was created by God?" Apart from being a lousy argument FOR creationism, it is a poor argument AGAINST science - again; this is a misrepresentation of the science they are supposedly attacking.

First and foremost; as Richard Dawkins observed, if there is a God, and he or she or it is a creator, it is then a life form. As we have noticed, complex life forms occur later on time, as a necessity. Life begins as single-celled organisms and THEN works it way up to democrats and republicans, not vice versa. Surely a creator deity would be the most complex life form possible -- able to shape, nay, create the world, the universe?

Even if you want to completely ignore that aspect and use the "well, God exists outside of science" defense - and a flimsy one it is, I will concede that it is impossible to prove the nonexistance of God (although the I would stand by Occham's Razor and argue that the burden of proof lies on the side making a positive assertion - because, if we say the burden of proof lies on the side saying "I will not believe without proof", suddenly everything is backwards - imagine if court worked that way - I accuse you of, say, witchcraft, and instead of me having to PROVE you are a witch, you have to prove that you are NOT a witch, or you burn. We've seen this before, and it's not pretty, it's not justice, and it's not rational.

I digress, again.

"If we believe that the universe was created out of nothing..." well, that's not really what the Big Bang is about at all. We know that matter and energy - particles and waves - share more similarity on the quantum level than traditional physics had ever thought, and under extreme pressure and temperature, like a diamond produced from coal, under the right conditions, energy and matter can be in a state of flux - consider plasma and then think about even greater temperatures than are produced by the fusion reactions of stars - indeed, it is theorized that, when the universe as we know it was just born, electromagnetism, gravity, and the weak and strong nuclear forces were all fused in one unified force.

So, O.K., big deal, you might say, so under extreme conditions, it may be possible for energy to be converted to matter, what does that prove? There was no ENERGY, right? Wrong. We don't know for sure where it came from, but there was energy in the universe before the big bang. Brane theory and the cyclic universe model hypothesize that perhaps we are living on a thin slice of existance - that our universe is but one of many extraordinarily thin membranes in a four (or more) dimensional multiverse, and the big bang was only the most recent of cataclysmic collisions of these membranes that triggered a "reset" of sorts.

Now, we don't know for sure that this happened, it's merely conjecture, but it has a certain elegance and simplicity to it. For people who fail to grasp the idea, it may seem that it's just as likely that there was an intelligent force at work, but if all we really need to get this whole thing started is a little energy, why is a God even necessary? If all God did was light a match, can you really give him credit for life in all it's form and splendor?

So there is, at least a bit better of a model of the Big Bang then merely saying "Well, it just happened". I am by no means an expert on the subject - I am not a theoretical physicist. If you would like to learn more about the origins of the universe, I highly recommend A Brief History of Time and The Universe in a Nutshell by Stephen Hawking. If you would like to learn more about evolutionary biology, I highly recommend that you read Charles Darwin's The Origin of Species, Richard Dawkins' The Blind Watchmaker, and Stephen Jay Gould's Wonderful Life. If you would like to know more about String Theory and Brane Theory, I wholeheartedly urge you to read "The Elegant Universe", by Brian Greene, or to watch the NOVA television miniseries based on the book, presented by the author. Indeed if you don't wish to take the time to read any of the aforementioned books, at least do yourself the favour of watching this program, it is entertaining and simplistic enough not to bore or confuse those not as well versed in science as they might like to be, and informative and intriguing enough to whet the appetite of all but the most anti-scientific amongst us.

Now, to tie everything together. Things like the evolution of complex life, and even more the big bang, seem impossible to our human minds because of their grand scale. But the largest factor in all of these things has been that which we don't take the time to think about most of the time: and that is time.

What I mean is this: it is simply not possible to truly comprehend the vast quantities of time that have passed, so that all this: computers, the internet, youtube, could be here.

Cosmic microwave background radiation tells us that the universe as we know it is approximately 13 billion, 7 hundred million years old, give or take two hundred million.

Now, some fundamentalists actually believe that the Earth (and the universe) is only around SIX THOUSAND years old.

I'm going to pause for a second to let that sink in.

The margin of error for the actual age of the universe is thirty-three-thousand-three-hundred-and-thirty-three TIMES what some people believe is the actual age of the universe! JUST THE MARGIN OF ERROR! When you compare the actual age of the universe to the paltry 6,000 years some people still claim to believe to be the age of the universe, it is actually two-million-two-hundred-eighty-three-thousand-three-hundred-thirty-three TIMES the age that fundamentalists believe it to be. 13.7 BILLION years. That's a lot of time, to say the least.

The earth itself is a scant 4.6 billion years old, still seven-hundred-sixty-six-thousand-six-hundred-sixty-six times the 6000 measly, puny years claimed by fundamentalists. Still a LOT of time. 4.6 BILLION years.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Aaron
• Atheist
• atheism
• science
• big
• bang
• evolution
• star
• trek

[divvy1400yam600]

I haven't watched much of your video but you mention straw men so I will point out one for you...

Criticising what creationists believe does not make Natural Selection true.

Am I wrong ?

[AtheistAaron]

No, but that is kind of the point. I have never heard a Creationist actually provide any positive evidence for any kind of supernatural event. All they do is try to find "holes" in evolutionary theory. If you are looking for an education, I suggest a school or library, this is a debunking video, not a lecture.

[webslinger123]

Dude, great points and all, but the backround music is distracting and annoying.

[dean10007]

A big issue is that there are many people who base their beliefs on a book and then base their judgements on said beliefs. This often leads to people being stripped of rights (gay marriage being a major issue at the moment), as well as wars being fought solely in the name of "God"

[socratus1]

Does evolution begin on big bang level? According to Theory of Probability (look wiki pedia - the infinite monkey theorem ) it was impossible to create Intellect Existence by the chance during as short time as 14 billions years after big bang So, there are two opportunities 1 If big bang is true theory then must be an intellectual beginning inside it 2 If big bang is not true then according to Probability Universe has chance not zero but nearly zero to creat Intellect Existence

[15freeSpins]

what about the earth?who put it there?ones sane mind can only understand that there is a creator and his name is Allah, even christians say Allah in arabic.and heres a little something for the idiot,ignorant worthless people that say we originated from monkeys,did you forget that again in the qurran and the bible it says adam was the first human,not the animals you fucken gronks..get over it.skulls like yours can only be broken with proof like this,if not,then your blinded to the truth.losers.

[15freeSpins]

listen up you ignorant fool,and to people alike. 1st of all its stated in the holy qurran and in the bible that god CREATED adam and eve,anyway now to leave you dumb founded and your buddies too.1.something cant come from nothing(its only logic).2.if you walked into your room and seen a lit ciggarette,what would you think to yourself?again logic,of course that someone put it there,3.a building cant just appear by itself it needs a builder,4.a car needs a manufacturer they dont just appear and 5.

[darrellmellissa]

@demer64 The bible says man was created, not the world.

[Rockstafeller]

ROFL!!! Why the hell people think that inflationary multiverse is an alternative to God??? for inflation to even occur in eternal zero-energy field, there must have been some tiny bit surplus of energy to get the whole thing started. this right here, is the ultimate proof for Universal Mind. that eternal energy field must have been in equilibrium, so something must have started work through energy field, but which wasnt energy field itself

[sihsobhk]

On the contrary, evidence in fossil record has proven beyond any doubt among scientists. Intelligent design has nothing other than an old book which could be fiction. And you mentioned God, which one? Yaweah, Allah, Shiva, Ra, Zeus, Odin, etc? Just because you grow up in, I presume, Christianity, that doesn't make your religion more true than any other religions. Do you know any Muslims, Hindis, Buddhists, Jewishs, etc who have faith as strong, if not stronger, as you?

[drusio210071]

evoluton Has never been proven. why are you trying so hard to make people not belive in God? why not just let them belive in what they want they arent hurting anyone.if it makes there life easy knowing that there is something better then life then why stop them?why do you want them to think that they are worthless and that all they are are germs and that life means nothing.

[CommentsKing]

n.e.r.d.s.

[spoddie]

I stopped watching at 6 seconds. Do you really need to be told that having a drink before the end of the first second of your video is bad form?