A Debate March 19: What’s Behind It All? God, Science, and the Universe

From evolutionnews.org:

Watch Meyer Take on Krauss and Lamoureux, Streaming Live at Evolution News on March 19
Those on the Darwinist, materialist, atheist side of the debate that we follow here aren’t normally very good at listening and responding to scientific perspectives at variance from their own. They are much more interested in condemning and ridiculing — which has got to be a poor strategy for them if they want to persuade anyone.

With that as the background, as we noted already, it’s refreshing that arch-atheist cosmologist Lawrence Krauss has agreed to participate in a public conversation with Discovery Institute’s Stephen Meyer, joined by theistic evolutionist Denis Lamoureux. That will be March 19 at the University of Toronto’s Convocation Hall. We’re looking forward to it — and here’s the even better news. You won’t have to be in Toronto to enjoy the discussion. The event will stream live here at Evolution News.

The subject is “What’s Behind It All? God, Science, and the Universe.” Simply check back here at 7 pm Eastern/4 pm Pacific for a front row seat, wherever you are. It’s just ten days away! Don’t miss a moment of it.

We will certainly be listening in, and encourage you to do so as well. Dr. Krauss is discussed in the latest issue of Salvo, in an article you can read online (excerpt below).

Salvo36Faith Removal
Militant Science & Apostle Krauss by Regis Nicoll

. . . The claim that science is intrinsically atheistic is but one of the many fictions Krauss must produce to hold his overarching myth together. Take his paradoxical statement, “The more we learn about the workings of the universe, the more purposeless it seems.”

Our ability to learn about the universe derives from the fact that it is governed by laws and exhibits a rational order and functional design that reflect purpose. Given our knowledge of the integrated complexity of nature, it would seem that the purpose of the quantum field is the formation and stability of matter; that the purpose of matter is to shape space; that the purpose of space is to accommodate matter; that the purpose of gravity is to form stars and planets; and that the purpose of stars and planets is to support life, particularly human life. As theoretical physicist Freeman Dyson was drawn to conclude, “The more I examine the universe and the details of its architecture, the more evidence I find that the universe in some sense must have known we were coming.” . . .

He’s also talked about in Salvo before in this amusing piece by Patrick Henry Reardon–Can Science Explain “Origins”?

A review of Dr. Meyer’s book, The Signature In the Cell, can be found here.

Science on Purpose

A Sidebar from the article Faith Removal: Militant Science & Apostle Krauss by Regis Nicoll in the new issue of Salvo.

Subscribe today at a discounted rate along with the special Salvo Science/Faith issue.


“The more we learn about the workings of the universe, the more purposeless it seems.”

It’s uncertain just whom exactly theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss is referring to when he says “we”—certainly not the great minds of science quoted here.

“Another source of conviction in the existence of God, connected with the reason and not with the feelings, impresses me as having much more weight. This follows from the extreme difficulty or rather impossibility of conceiving this immense and wonderful universe, including man with his capacity of looking far backwards and far into futurity, as the result of blind chance or necessity. When thus reflecting I feel compelled to look to a First Cause having an intelligent mind in some degree analogous to that of man; and I deserve to be called a Theist.” —Charles Darwin

“I’m not an atheist, and I don’t think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the books but doesn’t know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God.”—Albert Einstein

“Those laws are within the grasp of the human mind. God wanted us to recognize them by creating us after his own image so that we could share in his own thoughts . . . and if piety allows us to say so, our understanding is in this respect of the same kind as the divine, at least as far as we are able to grasp something of it in our mortal life.”—Johannes Kepler

“There is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all. . . . It seems as though somebody has fine tuned nature’s numbers to make the Universe. . . . The impression of design is overwhelming.”—Paul Davies

“I believe that a full understanding of this remarkable human capacity for scientific discovery ultimately requires the insight that our power in this respect is the gift of the universe’s Creator who, in that ancient and powerful phrase, has made humanity in the image of God (Genesis I:26–27). Through the exercise of this gift, those working in fundamental physics are able to discern a world of deep and beautiful order–a universe shot thorough with signs of mind. I believe that it is indeed the Mind of that world’s Creator that is perceived in this way.  Science is possible because the universe is a divine creation.”—John Polkinghorne

“To know the mighty works of God, to comprehend His wisdom and majesty and power; to appreciate, in degree, the wonderful workings of His laws, surely all this must be a pleasing and acceptable mode of worship to the Most High, to whom ignorance cannot be more grateful than knowledge.”—Nicolaus Copernicus

“The more I study nature, the more I stand amazed at the work of the Creator. Science brings men nearer to God.”—Louis Pasteur

“A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.”—Fred Hoyle

“There can never be any real opposition between religion and science; for the one is the complement of the other. Every serious and reflective person realizes, I think, that the religious element in his nature must be recognized and cultivated if all the powers of the human soul are to act together in perfect balance and harmony. And indeed it was not by accident that the greatest thinkers of all ages were deeply religious souls.”—Max Planck

“I believe that the more thoroughly science is studied, the further does it take us from anything comparable to atheism.”—Lord William Kelvin

“It is evident that an acquaintance with natural laws means no less than an acquaintance with the mind of God therein expressed.”—James Joule

“In the absence of any other proof, the thumb alone would convince me of God’s existence.”—Sir Isaac Newton

“Those who devote themselves to the purpose of proving that there is no purpose constitute an interesting subject for study.”—Alfred North Whitehead

Source: godevidence.com/2010/08/quotes-about-god/

Sweden and Surrogacy

Who would have guessed that Sweden would be leading the way in bioethics (at least in one area)? From The Guardian:  All surrogacy is exploitation – the world should follow Sweden’s ban by Kajsa Ekis Ekman

Salvo has covered Repro Tech a number of times. You’ll want to read this one in particular if this is a topic of interest to you. Unnatural Births: Assisted Reproductive Technologies & Their Side Effects by Terrell Clemmons

. . . As a nurse, mother of four, and graduate student in bioethics at Trinity International University in Deerfield, Illinois, Jennifer Lahl saw a need for serious discussions about the ethics of what was fast becoming possible with medical technology. It was the era of Dolly, the sheep cloned in 1996, and other morally questionable practices, such as freezing embryos and potential designer babies. After securing the go-ahead to start a non-profit in lieu of writing a thesis, she wrote a plan with bylaws and articles of incorporation, established a budget, and assembled a board of directors. And thus was born the Center for Bioethics and Culture (CBC). Although the organization does not bear her name, she has served as executive director ever since.

Jennifer and her colleagues collect information and advocate both for medical studies on the effects of ethically ambiguous technologies and for better legislation regulating their practice. But given the growing demand by same-sex couples for “their own” children, and a complicit, sound-bite-oriented media ducking any reporting that might provoke a charge of being “anti-science,” they often find themselves a lone voice of reason against a chorus of emotion.

The CBC’s widest reach has come through making and showing documentaries. “I always tell people, ‘It’s a story war—competing stories,'” Jennifer says.

Right now, the story on [the ART industry] is, “We have this wonderful new technology, and people who desperately want children but can’t have them—whether because of infertility, or because they waited too long to start their family, or because they’re a same-sex couple or single or whatever—these people can now have children! So what could be wrong with this wonderful new technology that’s going to help them?”

Our story is, “It’s not wonderful new technology. It’s technology that’s full of problems. It risks women’s health, and risks the health of children. And it’s a class-based system. Only the wealthy can afford these technologies, and the poor people end up having to sell or rent their bodies to them. People think they can go to the IVF doctor and get a baby in nine months. It doesn’t work that way. Many people go through many, many IVF cycles, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars, and don’t get a baby.”