On 4/25/2011 9:08 AM, Darren New wrote:
> On 4/25/2011 4:03, andrel wrote:
>> - I don't see how I can base any ethics/morality on the existence of a
>> God.
>
> I think if the god in question has scientifically-backed evidence, it's
> unlikely to be a god that has anything to do with human ethics or morality.
>
> I.e., I'd agree with you with the god of the bible, but I can't imagine
> what form scientific evidence in support of that god might be. But there
> are lots of ways one can imagine to find the creator of the universe
> exists that hasn't anything to do with specifically creating life on
> earth or morality. For example, the "fine tuned universal constants"
> argument, if actually supported, would be evidence (not proof) of a
> creator that maybe was aiming for carbon/water based life, but saying
> nothing about Earth, morality, humans, etc.
>
Mind, it only implies carbon based life due to lack of evidence "here" 
that you could have anything else (and since dominant life tends to eat 
anything that might be different...) You could make a similar argument 
for DNA needing to be the way it is, only.. maybe not, since you can 
insert DNA that uses different coding into an animal, and have it 
replicate. Its just not certain yet if it could a) form in that 
alternate way from the start, or b) function as a genome, not just as 
non-functional insertions.

So.. More information needed before you can make a coherent claim as to 
what defines, "fined tuned to produce us", even assuming you got as far 
as, "fine tuned to produce life at a rate of 
1:254257429872394634632496234 places in it. lol

Post a reply to this message