Another destruction of the nonexistent Creator

Sorry, buddy, but either prove you exist or … well, nothing, then

The ever-eloquent and intelligently-written Greta Christina has a new piece on AlterNet examining – and tearing down – that trusty old argument/excuse of theists’ on the origin of everything: that nothing comes from nothing; therefore, there has to have been a Creator; therefore, God exists. As Greta notes, this is a nonsensical argument; here’s a short excerpt detailing just how and why.

There have been countless times throughout history when we thought that Phenomenon (X) had a supernatural cause. Must have had a supernatural cause. Could not possibly have been caused by anything other than the supernatural. Why the sun rises and sets; why people get sick; what causes the weather and the seasons; why children look like their parents; how the complex variety of life came into being; etc., etc., etc. We didn't have a clue what caused it, or even the shadow of a clue...so we assumed it was God. (Or spirits, or demons, or whatever.)

And every single time that we eventually got a conclusive answer to the cause of Phenomenon (X), that answer has been entirely natural.

So why on earth would we assume that any currently unanswered question about physical existence -- even a massive and baffling question like how it all came to exist in the first place -- would eventually turn out to be caused by God? It's never been the right answer before. Not even once. Why would we assume it's the right answer this time?

Finally, and most importantly:

There is not a single scrap of evidence that the God hypothesis is true.

There is not a single scrap of evidence suggesting that the universe had a supernatural cause, or that there are any supernatural beings or forces affecting it in any way.

As my wife Ingrid likes to point out: The universe does not look like one in which an independent outside agent is intervening. The universe does not look like one in which miracles happen and physical laws are violated by someone who's above these laws. The universe looks remarkably like a system of physical cause and effect: an unimaginably massive, intensely complex system of physical cause and effect, but physical cause and effect nonetheless. And every single attempt to demonstrate the existence of any supernatural force or entity affecting the universe -- at least, every attempt using careful, rigorous, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, etc. scientific methods -- has fallen flat on its face.

Just as does the “Goddidit” argument. As I’ve said before and will say again: if there is no possibly way to scientifically observe or examine something, either in itself or through whatever influence it may hold on the world around it, then it’s best to assume it simply isn’t there. This is exactly the argument I use to claim that the Christian God simply doesn’t exist (at least, with a high, but not absolute, level of certainty): that even if he does exist, then he has less observable influence on the world around us than your average ant, which directly contradicts the supposedly infallible image of the omnipotent God, thereby destroying it. (And even then, ants can build stuff, which already is far more than we’ve seen any divine power accomplish.) You can argue all you want about there being a giant flying purple elephant in the room; if we can’t see it, feel it, smell it, measure or observe it with any superhuman tools or instruments, and also cannot detect any sign of it affecting anything at all around it, then I’m going to have to doubt your claim that there’s anything there at all. (And, possibly, believe that you are crazy.)

The rest of the piece is equally good, so be sure to read it all. I suspect Ray Comfort will stay far away from this one – seeing his flagship argument torn to shreds so effortlessly might make him regress into something even more stupid and ignorant.

(via Greta Christina’s Blog)