Saturday, May 26, 2018 |
Department: Basic Training —
Topic: ID —
Fine-Tuning Is Unlikely, but Unlikely Things Happen All the Time
by Tim Barnett
I recently wrote an article about how we live in a very fortunate universe.1 This is evident by the incomprehensible precision of the laws of physics for the possibility of life. The fine-tuning of the fundamental constants and initial conditions of the universe demand an explanation. I think the best explanation is a Designer.
In response to my article, I've encountered a number of challenges. These challenges do not disagree with the scientific evidence itself. Rather, they challenge the conclusion I've reached from the evidence. In this article I'd like to offer a quick response to one of the most popular challenges.
The first challenge I want to look at goes like this: "Yes, the fine-tuning of the universe for life is highly unlikely, but unlikely things happen all the time."
For a standard example of a highly unlikely event, look no further than your own existence. For you to exist, your mom and dad had to meet, fall in love, and have sex at just the right time. Not only that, but you are the result of a particular sperm—one in 300,000,000—and a particular egg—one in 2,000,000. We can multiply the improbability of your existence by looking at the likelihood of your grandparents meeting and conceiving your parents. You get the point. You are highly unlikely, but here you are.
In the same way, it is argued, the universe is highly unlikely, but here it is. Unlikely things happen, and we don't need to appeal to a designer to explain it.
This response may have some rhetorical force, but it makes a fundamental mistake. To expose the error, let me give you another illustration. Imagine your best friend has been murdered and the lead suspect is on trial. In fact, DNA evidence puts the suspect at the scene with the murder weapon in hand. As a result, the defense attorney turns to the jury and says, "The DNA evidence makes it highly unlikely that my client is innocent. But unlikely things happen all the time. For example, for you to exist, your mom and dad had to meet, fall in love, and have sex at just the right time. . . .
Would any jury accept this response? I think we would have to say no.
But why wouldn't they accept it? It is because there is a better explanation; namely, that the suspect really is the killer.
Let me give you one more illustration to help make my point. Imagine we sit down to play poker. Every time you deal, I get a random assortment of cards (e.g., King high, pair of eights, Jack high, pair of tens, Ace high). However, every time I deal, I get a royal flush (e.g., royal flush, royal flush, royal flush, royal flush, royal flush). The probability of getting a single royal flush is one in 649,739.
After the fifth royal flush, you insist that I'm cheating. That is, I'm designing the outcome. But what if I responded, "Yes, five consecutive royal flushes is highly unlikely, but unlikely things happen all the time. In fact, for you to exist your mom and dad had to meet, fall in love, and have sex. . . .
There is an important distinction between the unlikelihood of your existing and the unlikelihood of dealing myself five royal flushes. It's the availability of a better explanation. In the case where I deal myself five royal flushes, it is better explained by the fact that I am cheating rather than that it just happened by chance. In the same way, the fine-tuning of the universe for life is better explained by a cosmic Designer.
How do we really know that design is the best explanation for the fine-tuning of the universe for life? In the same way we know that I designed the outcome to get five royal flushes in a row. A royal flush is highly improbable, but it is just as improbable as any other hand in poker. What makes a royal flush so special is that this sequence of cards matches a pattern that corresponds to a winning hand in poker. Therefore, it's the high improbability plus the specified pattern that tips us off to design.
Let me say this again so it isn't missed. It's not merely the high improbability of an event that leads to a design inference. It's the high improbability combined with an independently specified outcome that leads to the conclusion of design.
Consequently, the fine-tuning of the universe for life is not merely highly improbable. It's highly improbable plus an independently specified outcome. It's finely tuned for the existence of life. Therefore, the fine-tuning of the universe for life is best explained by a cosmic Designer. •
This article is lightly adapted from its original version, published at Stand to Reason (Feb. 24, 2017) and available at: str.org/blog/fine-tuning-unlikely-unlikely-things-happen-all-time#.WN68gIVrOHk.
Note 1. http://www.str.org/article/we-live-very-fortunate-universe.
Tim Barnett is a professional apologist and speaker with Stand to Reason, and an adjunct Bible and science teacher at Innova Academy in Newmarket, Ontario. He and his wife Stacey have three daughters.
More on ID from the Salvo online archives.
Column: Operation ID — Salvo 37
Greater Than the Sum
Why the Design in Living Things Goes Far Beyond Machinery by Jonathan Wells
Department: Parting Shot — Salvo 36
Our Quantum Leap
There Is a Huge Chasm Between Humans & Nonhuman Animals by Michael Egnor
Column: Deprogram — Salvo 31
The Law of Conservation of Information: Part II
If Information Theory Is Right, Darwinian Evolution Isn't Even Possible by Denyse O'Leary
YOU SHOULD SUBSCRIBE!
Salvo subscribers have full access to the online archives!
Salvo magazine unblushingly offers an honest, rational, and respectful perspective to hard questions about SCIENCE, SEX, and SOCIETY.
Full access to the Salvo online archives. Only $15.99.
Get 4 issues + full access to the online archives. Only $25.99.
Consider ordering a bulk subscription for a reading group or a small group!
The Current Issue—Spring 2018
A Salvo Fake Ad
Visit the blog of Salvo author Robin Phillips
Salvo 43—Winter 2017
A Boy's Life: 5 Recommendations for Shielding Our Sons from the Anti-Culture—And Setting Them Towards Manhood by Anthony Esolen
Optimal Optics: Evolutionists Don't Know a Good Eye When They See One by Jonathan Wells
Up for Grabs: In Science, When 'Anything Goes,' Everything Goes by Denyse O'Leary
Revolution 101: How the 'New Civics' Is Fomenting Civil Unrest by Terrell Clemmons
Salvo 42—Fall 2017
Engendered Confusion: The Chaos of Postmodern Sexuality by Laurie Higgins
Zombie Killer: The "Icons of Evolution" Have Joined the Ranks of the Undead by Denyse O'Leary
Mutant Destruction: Does Cancer Really Innovate? by Jonathan Wells
The Darwin Tales: It's Time to Remit Darwinian Storytelling to the Annals of History by Terrell Clemmons
Eye Openers: Eight Common Factors for Atheists Changing Their Minds About God by Matt Nelson
Tuning Out the Universe: How Naturalism & Post-Fact Science Ignore the Evidence We See by Denyse O'Leary
Improbably So: Fine-Tuning Is Unlikely, but Unlikely Things Happen All the Time by Tim Barnett
Deep-Seated Rights: What They Are & Why You Have Them by Steve Jones
The Long Red Shadow: Mike Shotwell Has a Message for Millennial America by Terrell Clemmons
Taking Polls Apart: Human Complexity Foils Electoral Predictions by Denyse O'Leary
Champ Change: Darwinism's Rumble in the Jungle by Regis Nicoll
Morality as Story: The False Charity of Modern Journalism by Rebekah Curtis
4 issues of Salvo PLUS full access to the online archives!
• Give a Gift Sub
• Manage Sub Account
• About Salvo
• The Fake Ads
• Login for Full Access
• Touchstone Magazine
• The Fellowship of St. James
All material Ⓒ 2017. Salvo is published by The Fellowship of St. James.