PDA

View Full Version : Answering Athiests: Watch in the sand



Ibn Syed
06-13-2005, 08:13 PM
:sl:

An article:


Answering Atheists: Watch in the Sand ?!

Suppose you find a watch in the middle of a desert. What would you conclude? Would you think that someone dropped the watch? Or would you suppose that the watch came by itself?

Of course no sane person would say that the watch just happened to emerge from the sand. All the intricate working parts could not simply develop from the metals the lay buried in the earth. The watch must have a manufacturer.

If a watch tells accurate time? Consider the sunrise and sunset. Their timings are so strictly regulated that scientists can publish in advance the sunrise and sunset times in your daily newspapers. But who regulates the timings of sunrise and sunset?



Allah tells us in the Quran : "Behold! In the creation of the heavens and the earth; in the alternation of the Night and the Day; in the sailing of the ships through the Ocean for the profit of mankind; in the rain which Allah sends down from the skies, and the life which He gives therewith to an earth that is dead; in the beasts of all kinds that He scatters through the earth; in the change of the winds and the clouds which they trail like their slaves between the sky and the earth, (here) indeed are Signs for a people that are wise"


The message is clear, if a watch can not work without an intelligent maker, how can the sun appear to rise and set with such clockwork regularity? Could this occur by itself?

Consider also that we benefit from the sun only because it remains at a safe distance from the earth, a distance that averages 93 million miles. If it got much closer the earth would burn up. And if it got too far away the earth would turn into an icy planet making human life here impossible.

Who decided in advance that this was the right distance? Could it just happen by chance? Without the sun plants would not grow. Then animals and humans would starve. Did the sun just decide to be there for us ?!

The rays of the sun would be dangerous for us had it not been for the protective ozone layer in our atmosphere. The atmosphere around earth keeps the harmful ultraviolet rays from reaching us. Who was it that placed this shield around us?

We need to experience sunrise. We need the sun's energy and it's light to see our way during the day. But we also need sunset. We need a break from the heat, we need the cook of night and we need the lights to out so we may sleep. Who regulated this process to provide what we need?

Moreover, if we had only the sun and the protection of the atmosphere we would want something more-beauty. Our clothes provide warmth and protection, yet we design them to also look beautiful. Knowing or need for beauty, the designer of sunrise and sunset also made the view of them to be simply breathtaking.

The creator who gave us light, energy, protection and beauty deserves our thanks. Yet some people insist that he does not exist. What would they think if they found a watch in the desert? An accurate, working watch? A beautifully designed watch? Would they not conclude that there does exist a watchmaker? An intelligent watchmaker? One who appreciates beauty? Such is God who made us.

http://english.islamway.com/bindex.php?section=article&id=161

:w:

root
06-14-2005, 12:13 PM
Consider the sunrise and sunset. Their timings are so strictly regulated that scientists can publish in advance the sunrise and sunset times in your daily newspapers. But who regulates the timings of sunrise and sunset?

I find this arguement floored and a bit of a waste of time when you consider the "Infinate" planet formations around stars and the probability of the gravitational pull of the sun does not require a leap of faith to accept an infinate number of planets at an acceptable distance from the sun.

Muhammad
06-22-2005, 05:26 PM
I find this arguement floored and a bit of a waste of time when you consider the "Infinate" planet formations around stars and the probability of the gravitational pull of the sun does not require a leap of faith to accept an infinate number of planets at an acceptable distance from the sun.The point being discussed is not the existence of the planets but their perfect regulation...

'The sun and the moon run on their fixed courses (exactly) calculated with measured out stages for each (for reckoning).' [55: 5]

'And the heaven, He raised it high, and He made the balance
That you may not be inordinate in respect of the measure.
And keep up the balance with equity and do not make the measure deficient.' [55:7-9]

Since they were created they have forever remained in perfect balance...is this not an amazing sign? If one would just consider and ponder, then indeed it is.

root
06-22-2005, 05:59 PM
you mean their apparent perfect regulation.....

Muhammad
06-22-2005, 06:18 PM
If you think the system is not perfect, then feel free to explain why. Though the way the sun and moon appear and disappear at fixed times during the day, giving us the distinction of day and night, and the earth orbiting the sun giving the timing of the year etc etc. - all these are evidences of perfect regulation.

root
06-22-2005, 07:25 PM
all these are evidences of perfect regulation.

I agree that they do look to have apparent perfection. One should ask are we evolved perfectly into our surroundings or are our surroundings perfectly evolved for us?

As a point of interest we may orbit the sun, but the sun orbits the galaxy and goes in an up and down motion which constantly dips the solar system into high populated space that garuntees frequent comet impacts. I don't know where the notion of a perfect solar system or indeed planet comes from. It's far from perfect, it's chaotic in fact. Your parallel to the perfection of a watch and the perfection of the universe\mankind is a very good analogy but the watch could be seen as perfect if you imagined such a fine watch to be perfection then why is the universe and even our planet far from perfect but at the very least ideal?

Ansar Al-'Adl
06-22-2005, 07:43 PM
:sl:

The precise orbit of the earth has been described in one source as follows:

While rotating around the sun, the earth follows such an orbit that, every 18 miles, it only deviates 2.8 millimetres from a direct course. The orbit followed by the earth never changes, because even a deviation of 3 millimetres would cause catastrophic disasters: If the deviation were 2.5 mm instead of 2.8 mm, then the orbit would be very large, and all of us would freeze. If the deviation were 3.1 mm, we would be scorched to death. ( Bilim ve Teknik (Journal of Science and Technology), July 1983)

I think what is being described as perfectly calculated is the centripetal force and orbital velocity of the celestial bodies. The orbits are not in anyway chaotic, even the comets have a regular orbit.

As Harun Yahya writes:

Another characteristic of heavenly bodies is that they also rotate around their own axes. The verse which reads "[I swear] by Heaven with its cyclical systems," (Qur'an, 86:11) indicates this truth. Naturally, at the time when the Qur'an was revealed, people had no telescopes with which to study bodies millions of kilometres away in space, advanced observation technology or our modern knowledge of physics and astronomy. It was therefore impossible to establish that space had "its oscillating orbits," (Qur'an, 51:7) as described in the verse. The Qur'an however, revealed at that time, provided clear information concerning that fact. This is proof that this book is indeed Allah's Word. (Miracles of the Qur'an)

And:

THE SUN'S TRAJECTORY

It is stressed in the Qur'an that the Sun and Moon follow specific trajectories:

It is He Who created night and day and the sun and moon, each one swimming in a sphere. (Qur'an, 21:33)

The word "swim" in the above verse is expressed in Arabic by the word "sabaha" and is used to describe the movement of the Sun in space. The word means that the Sun does not move randomly through space but that it rotates around its axis and follows a course as it does so. The fact that the Sun is not fixed in position but rather follows a specific trajectory is also stated in another verse:

And the sun runs to its resting place. That is the decree of the Almighty, the All-Knowing. (Qur'an, 36:38)

These facts set out in the Qur'an were only discovered by means of astronomical advances in our own time. According to astronomers' calculations, the Sun moves along a path known as the Solar Apex in the path of the star Vega at an incredible speed of 720,000 kmph. In rough terms, this shows that the Sun traverses some 17.28 million km a day. As well as the Sun itself, all the planets and satellites within its gravitational field also travel the same distance.


:w:

root
06-23-2005, 01:04 PM
The precise orbit of the earth has been described in one source as follows:
While rotating around the sun, the earth follows such an orbit that, every 18 miles, it only deviates 2.8 millimetres from a direct course. The orbit followed by the earth never changes, because even a deviation of 3 millimetres would cause catastrophic disasters: If the deviation were 2.5 mm instead of 2.8 mm, then the orbit would be very large, and all of us would freeze. If the deviation were 3.1 mm, we would be scorched to death. ( Bilim ve Teknik (Journal of Science and Technology), July 1983)

I think what is being described as perfectly calculated is the centripetal force and orbital velocity of the celestial bodies. The orbits are not in anyway chaotic, even the comets have a regular orbit.

When life was just starting out 3.8 billion years ago, the sun was much
fainter than the sun we know today. So the Earth didn't receive nearly as
much solar energy as it does now, yet life still evolved. that at that time the sun's luminosity was 75% of what it is today, and that it was 25% dimmer. This means that past temperatures were significantly lower than today. that at 75% of present luminosity, the mean temperature of the Earth would have been 268 K
(that's -5.15 *C, below the freezing point of water!) had it not been for
the greenhouse effect. So an atmosphere capable of trapping heat is
important for planets too far from the sun to support liquid water.

All this evidence can lead us to only one conclusion. The distance
of a planet (or moon) from the sun may or may not plays a role in the
formation of life. We Must consider other factors. Indeed further to this and with relevence to life throughout the universe the Earth could have orbited within a "safe zone" around the sun of more than 100 miles +/-

I think your perfection concept of orbital position died out along with the dinosaurs..........

Because I am lucky to be born when I consider all the actual astronomically large events that led directly to my birth does not imply it was so precise it must have been planned since "chance" could not have occured so infinately as it did>?

Muhammad
06-23-2005, 02:27 PM
When life was just starting out 3.8 billion years ago, the sun was much
fainter than the sun we know today. So the Earth didn't receive nearly as
much solar energy as it does now, yet life still evolved. that at that time the sun's luminosity was 75% of what it is today, and that it was 25% dimmer. This means that past temperatures were significantly lower than today. that at 75% of present luminosity, the mean temperature of the Earth would have been 268 K
(that's -5.15 *C, below the freezing point of water!) had it not been for
the greenhouse effect. So an atmosphere capable of trapping heat is
important for planets too far from the sun to support liquid water.

All this evidence can lead us to only one conclusion. The distance
of a planet (or moon) from the sun may or may not plays a role in the
formation of life. We Must consider other factors. Indeed further to this and with relevence to life throughout the universe the Earth could have orbited within a "safe zone" around the sun of more than 100 miles +/-

I think your perfection concept of orbital position died out along with the dinosaurs..........It still remains a fact that distance of a planet from the sun determines living conditions inside it. It does not matter what the atmospheric composition is, but a planet closer to the sun will be hotter than the one far from it. And since the distance of the earth has not changed so much as to destroy all life on it, this can be considered as perfection. It has already been explained that orbital position can vary, yet this does not mean it isn't perfectly regulated. You seem to ignore the fact that in all these millions of years, in a world as chaotic, full of chance and luck as yours, where countless infinitely small probabilities have actually come about, nothing has happened to distort the position of the earth and kill everything on it. It could be that some divine Being is maintaining such a fine balance...


Because I am lucky to be born when I consider all the actual astronomically large events that led directly to my birth does not imply it was so precise it must have been planned since "chance" could not have occured so infinately as it did>? We do not believe that chance led to your birth, but it was God Who Planned that it would happen at the precise moment of time in which it did.

Some verses to consider:
'It is He Who made the sun a shining thing and the moon as a light and measured out for it stages that you might know the number of years and the reckoning. Allah did not create this but in truth. He explains the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations etc.) in detail for people who have knowledge.' [10: 5]

'And He has subjected to you the night and the day, and the sun and the moon; and the stars are subjected by His Command. Surely, in this are proofs for people who understand.' [16: 12]

'And a sign for them is the night. We withdraw therefrom the day, and behold, they are in darkness.
And the sun runs on its fixed course for a term (appointed). That is the Decree of the All-Mighty, the All-Knowing.
And the moon, We have measured for it mansions (to traverse) till it returns like the old dried curved date stalk.
It is not for the sun to overtake the moon, nor does the night outstrip the day. They all float, each in an orbit.' [36: 37-40]

root
06-25-2005, 01:37 PM
You seem to ignore the fact that in all these millions of years, in a world as chaotic, full of chance and luck as yours, where countless infinitely small probabilities have actually come about, nothing has happened to distort the position of the earth and kill everything on it. It could be that some divine Being is maintaining such a fine balance...

it could be, but then again it could not be. We are only here because it has not, the dinasours for example did not benefit from a supposed enforced fine balance

Muhammad
06-25-2005, 02:29 PM
Whom of course COULD have existed or could have not. And if they did: remember they are not the ones for whom God created the Universe.

'Abd al-Baari
03-14-2007, 08:53 PM
Jazakallah for sharing bro

IceQueen~
03-14-2007, 08:59 PM
hm and also the big bang proves that the universe had a beginning and what has a beginning means that it can't be infinite! which means something made it happen out of nothing (big bang= zero volume etc)

nothing happens by itself

if someone rejects the BB then they are assuming that the uni is infinite but

does infinity have an end? No so that would mean we would never reach the end of infinity i.e. we would never reach 'today'

wilberhum
03-14-2007, 09:09 PM
the universe had a beginning
And that proves what?
There was something there b4 the bb.
That has been understood for a long time.

nothing happens by itself
So how did god happen?

'Abd al-Baari
03-14-2007, 09:13 PM
Do you belive in coinsidences bro?

I don't know how people can belive that there is no God. Science has said if the planet Earth was 5 miles further away from the sun, its whole orbit would change, and that means no life on Earth.

P.S i can't remember the source, i'll try and post it later

wilberhum
03-14-2007, 09:47 PM
I don't know how people can belive that there is no God.
Maybe because there is no proof.

Science has said if the planet Earth was 5 miles further away from the sun, its whole orbit would change, and that means no life on Earth.

Whooooooooooooo, the distance from earth to the sun varies one heck of a lot more than 5 miles. But still you are operating on the assumption that our being here is part of a 4.6 billion year plan.

Hemoo
03-19-2007, 09:18 PM
and as we may all agree

what does explotions do ??? what is the results after explotion ??

is it a mess or a new invention

what if there is some iron bars in a junk yard and we go and put some explosives , will we get a brand new car chassis (may be BMW)

no we will sure get a mess

so that is what was supposed to happen after the big bang but the creator wanted it to be a well-organized bang so thats why there is now a perfect enviromental system ...

i also ask my brothers and sisters in islam to listen to the video lectures by shiekh Yusuf estes he was doing a little talk about these matters ..


and peace

wilberhum
03-19-2007, 09:45 PM
and as we may all agree

what does explotions do ??? what is the results after explotion ??

is it a mess or a new invention

what if there is some iron bars in a junk yard and we go and put some explosives , will we get a brand new car chassis (may be BMW)

no we will sure get a mess

so that is what was supposed to happen after the big bang but the creator wanted it to be a well-organized bang so thats why there is now a perfect enviromental system ...

i also ask my brothers and sisters in islam to listen to the video lectures by shiekh Yusuf estes he was doing a little talk about these matters ..


and peace
Just another version of the watchmaker analogy. In three centuries since it was dreamed up, it and all of it kind have failed the logic test. :? :?

Pygoscelis
03-19-2007, 10:04 PM
This is a flawed argument brought up again and again by theists here and elsewhere and frankly I'm tired of debunking it.

So I'll make a separate observation instead.

Lets say that the universe was created. The earth was created. Humans were put on earth by a creator.

Now, given all of that:

Why must the creator still exist?

Why must the creator be benevolent?

Why must the creator be immortal?

Who created the creator?

Where are my car keys?

Hemoo
03-19-2007, 10:06 PM
what you said mr. welberhum is not a scientific reply

you did'nt show me how what i said has failed (your) logic test ??

i ask you which part of what i wrote that you don't agree to ...


we say that its most likely that the origin of the universe is an explosion

we call this explosion (the big bang)

we say that this big bang has led to the construction of all the stars and planets and their moons , etc



so you tell me how can an explosion produce an organized pattern

and plz give me an example of this case in our life so that i can understand your thoughts ..

Tiger_Stripes
03-19-2007, 10:14 PM
This is a flawed argument brought up again and again by theists here and elsewhere and frankly I'm tired of debunking it.

So I'll make a separate observation instead.

Lets say that the universe was created. The earth was created. Humans were put on earth by a creator.

Now, given all of that:

Why must the creator still exist?

Why must the creator be benevolent?

Why must the creator be immortal?

Who created the creator?

Where are my car keys?

1.) Why must the creator be mortal?

2.) The creator is benevolent since humans universally prefer good over evil.

3.) See #1

4.) If the creator is infinite and immortal, then he has no creator.

Hemoo
03-19-2007, 10:20 PM
and you mr. pygoscelis

you keep insisting that the laws and rules that exists in this universe must be applied outside the universe and outside the whole creation.

how can you do that

how can you try to apply this laws on the one who created them

you are so narrow minded if you keep thinking like so


i will give you an example and i hope i make it right so that you can understand it :

what if i made a program code in my windows platform that will contain a set of rules.
does that mean that the same rules must be applied on me
no it does not because i am the one who made that program and i have made up some rules that never can be applied on me or my life.


get it

wilberhum
03-19-2007, 10:23 PM
what you said mr. welberhum is not a scientific reply
There is nothing scientific about the watchmaker analogy.

you did'nt show me how what i said has failed (your) logic test ??

There is no logical conection between Mechanical and Biological.

i ask you which part of what i wrote that you don't agree to
All of them.

how can an explosion produce an organized pattern
It is all born out of collisions, not organization.

plz give me an example of this case in our life
Sorry, I can't think of an example. I think it is all chance.

NoName55
03-19-2007, 10:25 PM
When life was just starting out 3.8 billion years ago, the sun was much
fainter than the sun we know today. So the Earth didn't receive nearly as
much solar energy as it does now, yet life still evolved. that at that time the sun's luminosity was 75% of what it is today, and that it was 25% dimmer. This means that past temperatures were significantly lower than today. that at 75% of present luminosity, the mean temperature of the Earth would have been 268 K
(that's -5.15 *C, below the freezing point of water!) had it not been for
the greenhouse effect. So an atmosphere capable of trapping heat is
important for planets too far from the sun to support liquid water.

All this evidence can lead us to only one conclusion. The distance
of a planet (or moon) from the sun may or may not plays a role in the
formation of life. We Must consider other factors. Indeed further to this and with relevence to life throughout the universe the Earth could have orbited within a "safe zone" around the sun of more than 100 miles +/-

I think your perfection concept of orbital position died out along with the dinosaurs..........

Because I am lucky to be born when I consider all the actual astronomically large events that led directly to my birth does not imply it was so precise it must have been planned since "chance" could not have occured so infinately as it did>?are you Dan Patel, Undergraduate, Chemistry Major, Math Minor, University of Houston (2000)

edit:
He actually read these books then came to conclusion, that you plagerised above
"Earth: Evolution of a Habitable World" by Jonathan I. Lunine.

"Planet Earth: Cosmology, Geology, and the Evolution of Live and
Environment" by Cesare Emiliani

wilberhum
03-19-2007, 10:29 PM
Why must the creator be mortal?
Why must a creator be immortal?

The creator is benevolent since humans universally prefer good over evil.
Not a bad guess, but not Necessarly true. There are many evil people in this world.

If the creator is infinite and immortal, then he has no creator.
But what if the creator in not infinite and immortal?

Tiger_Stripes
03-19-2007, 10:35 PM
Why must a creator be immortal?

Who says a Creator has to be immortal? Nietzsche's notorious quote can actually be reality. It is my belief as a Muslim that God is immortal.


Not a bad guess, but not Necessarly true. There are many evil people in this world.

Those are exceptions. Many people do "evil" thinking that they are for the general good (ex. bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki).


But what if the creator in not infinite and immortal?

They perhaps he has a creator? It cannot be proven or disproven given human limits in attaining knowledge.

wilberhum
03-19-2007, 10:40 PM
bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki).
Oh no not another one. Gee I'm going to judge an entire war based on 2 days. I will forget who started it and what they were doing. You just can't beat that 2 day system.
PS: Do you know Japan was working on a nuke to drop on the US? So was Germany.

Tiger_Stripes
03-19-2007, 10:44 PM
Oh no not another one. Gee I'm going to judge an entire war based on 2 days. I will forget who started it and what they were doing. You just can't beat that 2 day system.
PS: Do you know Japan was working on a nuke to drop on the US? So was Germany.

The US dropped it because Truman's administration though it was the best move to protect America. Good intentions, evil move.

wilberhum
03-19-2007, 10:46 PM
The US dropped it because Truman's administration though it was the best move to protect America. Good intentions, evil move.
Ya, we should have let millions more die. :raging: :raging:
How about back on topic. :thumbs_up

Pygoscelis
03-19-2007, 11:02 PM
1.) Why must the creator be mortal?

No reason to think the creator is or is not mortal. I'm not the one making claims, thats the religious folk who do that. I'm perfectly content to admit I don't know and see no reason to invent things without any evidence.



2.) The creator is benevolent since humans universally prefer good over evil.


What does "humans universally prefer good over evil" mean? And why do human preferences necesitate God's nature? Seems rather backwards, no?



4.) If the creator is infinite and immortal, then he has no creator.

There is no reason to think it is inifinite or immortal.

czgibson
03-19-2007, 11:05 PM
Greetings,

1.) Why must the creator be mortal?

I think the point is that until there's any evidence for a creator, then all comments about it are just speculation.


2.) The creator is benevolent since humans universally prefer good over evil.

I always prefer to find free money in the streets. Does that mean that it's true that I will find free money tomorrow?


3.) See #1

That doesn't answer the question 'Who created the creator?'


4.) If the creator is infinite and immortal, then he has no creator.

But if something as simple as a watch must necessarily have a creator, then how much more necessary is it that something as complex as god also must have had a creator? This line of thinking ends up with an infinite regress of beings, all more complex than the last.

The truth is that the argument from design (of which the watchmaker analogy is a famous version) has never really convinced anybody but believers.

Peace

Tiger_Stripes
03-19-2007, 11:07 PM
No reason to think the creator is or is not mortal. I'm not the one making claims, thats the religious folk who do that. I'm perfectly content to admit I don't know and see no reason to invent things without any evidence.

Lack of reasons is not a reason enough to assume a mortal creator.


What does "humans universally prefer good over evil" mean? And why do human preferences necessitate God's nature? Seems rather backwards, no?

Every civilized society are governed by laws formulated for the GOOD of the general population. The ability to form morals and differentiate between what's right and wrong supports my assertion. How does it seem backward? The idea of an evil God is logically inconceivable.


There is no reason to think it is inifinite or immortal.

So you're assuming based on lack of reasons? The Greeks believed that the earth was stationary based on "lack of evidence to the contrary." We both know today how wrong they were, dont we?

Pygoscelis
03-19-2007, 11:18 PM
Lack of reasons is not a reason enough to assume a mortal creator.

No, you're right, it isn't. And lack of reasons is not reason enough to assume an immorta one either, or even one at all. What exactly is your point here? I was saying I was fine with not knowing and not creating stories just to fill in holes in my knowledge, like the religionists do.



Every civilized society are governed by laws formulated for the GOOD of the general population.

That sounds quite naive.

You think we all really wish to have a world that is fair to everyone, and not slanted to benefit ourselves over others? You think the rich and privileged want a society in which their children have the same hardships as other people's children?

You say that every civilized society is governed by laws formulated for the GOOD of the general population. Has such a society ever existed in reality on this earth?



The ability to form morals and differentiate between what's right and wrong supports my assertion.

I don't see how.


The idea of an evil God is logically inconceivable.

It is just as conceivable to me as a benevolent one. Given his apparent lack of interaction with his creation, what makes most sense is that he is completely disinterested, or doesn't exist.

Both socially constructive and socially destructive behavariour exist Both Joy and Suffering exists. Stories about how God will treat us after we're dead vary and some show him to be a very evil being.



So you're assuming based on lack of reasons?

No, I don't assume at all. There is no reason to assume either way. As I've noted again and againa above, I'm ok with not knowing. I'm not the one inventing stories and attempting to pass them off as the uncontestable Truth.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-13-2013, 05:21 PM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 06-11-2009, 08:18 PM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-14-2008, 10:24 PM
  4. Replies: 51
    Last Post: 06-08-2006, 08:21 AM