I came across a YouTube channel the other day which had some interesting videos about politics, morality and the likes (it can be found here if anyone is interested) and one video caught my attention. It was titled “Does science argue for or against God?” And judging by the like to dislike ratio (8k likes and 6k dislikes) I knew it was going to be interesting.

Unfortunately, as the like-dislike ratio should have given away, the video did not talk about how using science to ‘prove’ God goes against the fundamentals of what science is (that is, to explain phenomenon without invoking the supernatural) and instead goes into the fine-tuning argument, about how the criteria for life existing is so small that God must have made us.

Now, at best this only explains a deistic God, or an intelligent entity in the first place, and not the Christian God. Ignoring that, the argument is nothing but an argument from ignorance. Just because the chances for life existing are small, it does not mean that we were put here by a god. Sure, the odds are low, but that is no different to somebody being born. If things happened just a little differently any of us could easily not have been born. Do we need God to explain why we are here and not somebody else? No. We explain it with chance.

It is also interesting to note that if a god did make the universe, why would he make such a deadly and inhospitable HUGE universe, filled with radiation, meteors, black holes, freezing temperatures and no air, and then populate one tiny little planet in an obsolete place in an obsolete galaxy? 75% of the world’s surface is water, and humans don’t have gills. See the problem with a universe, or even a planet, being made ‘just for us’?

The second part of the video talks about how if the properties and strengths of each of the four fundamental forces (gravity, electromagnetic, strong nuclear, and weak nuclear) were even a tiny bit different, the universe could not exist. But I have always found this argument as another way of saying “If things were different, then things would be different.”

Further reading:

Problems with the fine-tuning argument (

Fine-tuning argument (

Image courtesy of xedos4 at


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s