Question:
Isn't it true that Atheist logic depends entirely on coincidences?
2008-12-22 10:04:29 UTC
Like it was just a coincidence a world that fits our needs of water, food, and oxygen was created somehow.
Then a coincidence happened that we appeared and with many body parts relevant to our needs. Arms to put food in the mouth, a throat to swallow it, a flap for when you swallow the food doesn't go into your lungs, then the vitamins are distributed to the body parts that needed, and the rest is stored in your stomach for later "excretion".
All of these things just formed, attached to each other and working with each other. It was all just a coincidence.
It is just a coincidence that this planet is a good distance from the Sun so it does not burn up, or freeze over.
It is just pure luck that gravity keeps us from floating away into space to die.
It is just pure luck and coincidence two genders of humans were formed, and they were compatible..

Seems a bit TOO coincidental, no?
Something HAD to create us.

Mind you, I am Christian and i do believe in Evolution.
23 answers:
Mr.Samsa
2008-12-22 10:10:04 UTC
If it turned out that the Sun was a little bigger, and Mars was the only planet that could support life, you'd probably still be calling that a coincidence. It's not really a coincidence, just the way things happened.
lainiebsky
2008-12-22 18:18:05 UTC
No.



"Like it was just a coincidence a world that fits our needs of water, food, and oxygen was created somehow."



Not a coincidence at all. How long do you think a life form that couldn't live on earth would have lasted here? The life that is on earth now is the life that was suited to it. Anything else died out very quickly.



Any body that is not suited for life would die too.



If there was no gravity, life would not have developed.



I don't think you quite grasp the concept of natural selection. No, nothing HAD to create us. You believe that humans were created, then an environment suited to them was created. That's backwards. The earth formed, then the kind of life that could live here developed.
2008-12-22 18:52:36 UTC
>Isn't it true that Atheist logic depends entirely on coincidences?



No, of course not. I suspect you don't really know very much about atheism.



>Like it was just a coincidence a world that fits our needs of water, food, and oxygen was created somehow.



As compared to what? If one in a million planets is like the Earth, then that means it was a pretty extreme coincidence that a terrestrial planet existed around the Sun, but it is NOT a coincidence that one exists in the Universe or even in this galaxy. It's just a matter of probability. Just like having 1000 dice roll sixes is very improbable if you're rolling 1000 dice, but very probable if you're rolling 1000000 dice.



>Then a coincidence happened that we appeared and with many body parts relevant to our needs.



That's not a coincidence, that's evolution. People born without arms or eyes or noses or whatever are less likely to reproduce and pass on their genes than people who are born with all those things. Organisms do not form by spontaneously getting a bunch of organs out of nowhere and attaching them together. Rather, they formed as a result of millions of years of evolution, millions of generations of ancestors with traits that helped them to survive and reproduce while other organisms died out. There is no coincidence involved in that.



>It is just a coincidence that this planet is a good distance from the Sun so it does not burn up, or freeze over.



With regards to the formation of the Solar System, yes maybe it was. With regards to our existence, not it was not. What you're failing to take into account here is the Anthropic Principle. That is to say, the fact that we exist and are carbon/water life forms means that the planet we HAVE to observe ourselves as having arisen on HAS to be a planet of the sort we could arise on. We cannot observe ourselves having arisen on a planet like Mercury or Jupiter simply because we could not have arisen there in the first place.



As an analogy, imagine a lottery. Imagine you take a cheque for a million dollars, and get a million people to buy tickets. One of them wins, and you give him the cheque. Was it a coincidence that that person won? Sure. Was it a coincidence that the person holding the cheque is the winner of the lottery? No, not in the least. It's the same thing with us and the Earth: We're not the players in the cosmic lottery of life, WE'RE THE PRIZE. That's what the Anthropic Principle is all about.



>It is just pure luck that gravity keeps us from floating away into space to die.



No, of course not. Life forms are more likely to arise and evolve intelligence on a place that can keep them from floating away into space.



>It is just pure luck and coincidence two genders of humans were formed, and they were compatible..



No, of course not. The genders did not form separately. Genders may have arisen from a single type of organism that split off into two slightly different but sexually compatible types. Less likely, it may have arisen when one type of organism found a way to use the chemistry of another type of organism to aid in its reproduction. I can explain either of these in more detail if you like, but the main point here is that it was not a matter of blind luck at all.



>Seems a bit TOO coincidental, no?



Not after you realize that most of it isn't coincidence at all.



>And, no saying if my legs were any shorter they would not touch the ground is not my logic.



But your 'logic' is pretty much equivalent to that. It's more the other way around though. Imagine what coincidence it is that the Earth just happened to have the right radius that we're standing on its surface and not floating above it! No, it wasn't a coincidence at all, THAT'S HOW THINGS HAPPEN. And it's the same way with pretty much everything else you've mentioned so far, it's just that evolution is somewhat more complicated than gravity and so it's easier for you to misrepresent it in your mind in order to validate your belief in a divine creator.
2008-12-22 18:14:19 UTC
"Like it was just a coincidence a world that fits our needs of water, food, and oxygen was created somehow."



Well we are most likely one of billions or more planets. Is it a coincidence that one (or a few) of billions of something have a certain quality? No it isn't.





"Then a coincidence happened that we appeared and with many body parts relevant to our needs."



Hence the theory of natural selection...







"All of these things just formed, attached to each other and working with each other. It was all just a coincidence."



Believe that if you will, I will stick with evolution.





"It is just a coincidence that this planet is a good distance from the Sun "



Again, we are probably one of billions of planets. Is it a coincidence if 1 out of a billion of something has a certain property? Not hardly.





"It is just pure luck that gravity keeps us from floating away into space to die."



No, that would be a fact.





"It is just pure luck and coincidence two genders of humans were formed, and they were compatible.."



No, it was the result of evolution.
2008-12-22 18:27:26 UTC
What particular coincidence are you talking about? One would expect in a universe filled with an almost infinite number of stars. One would expect a gaussian distribution of planets around these stars with repsect to size, mass, and distance from the central star. Therefore a water world in the life zone is not coincidental--in the gaussian distribution of stars--it would be expected. If this world would have been entirely water you wouldn't have required grasping apendages nor legs for locomotion. You have these things because over long periods of time they proved to be an advantage to survival. Gravity is not a coincidence it is a function of mass. What coincidences are you talking about-things are how they are because that is how nature shaped them. It's relatively obvious that if you weren't on the planet that was conducive to life--you wouldn't be here to write about it.
jtrusnik
2008-12-22 18:20:22 UTC
-Most planets can't support life. Naturally, we wouldn't naturally exist on those. The fact that all life happens to be found only on those planets that are conducive to life isn't really all that surprising.



-As for arms, throats, etc., evolution explains all of those body parts.



I work in a program for children with disabilities and, believe me, not everybody is born with all of these parts in working order (sometimes, the parts are missing altogether), even if the parents are in fine health and have no defects themselves. Is that a fact of the imperfections of biological processes, or do you call that a creator who really has it in for a baby that never had a chance to do anything to anybody?



If the throat doesn't lead to the stomach, the organism dies of starvation. If a stomach isn't attached to an excretory system, the organism dies of spectic shock. Those with the "plumbing" hooked up right live and can pass on their genetically-coded plumbing to their descendants.



Coincidence? Not really. It's just how natural selection works.



-Gravity is a mere fact of existence. If there's a god, that would be another mere fact of existence. Neither is based in chance.



-As for our sexes, if there was a sex that was incompatible with another sex, how many children would that a person with that sex leave behind?



Mind you, not all organisms are sexual. Most organisms, when you take into account microbes, are asexual.
Dawn G
2008-12-22 18:21:39 UTC
Actually, that is Christian logic. Most atheists understand that we evolved to fit our situation. If life has developed on a planet with say an ammonia atmosphere, then the creatures there will have evolved to breath ammonia, and would suffocate on earth.
Crabby Patty
2008-12-22 18:22:43 UTC
I see that you "DOO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION." That is a very good step. The next step would be to gain some understanding of how it works. It is no more coincidental than the water in a glass having the exact shape of the inside of the glass.
2008-12-22 18:13:42 UTC
No...you have it backwards. We are here only because those things are here, not the other way around.

----

. . . imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, ‘This is an interesting world I find myself in’an interesting hole I find myself in’fits me rather neatly, doesn’t it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!’ This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, it’s still frantically hanging on to the notion that everything’s going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for.

--Douglas Adams
Jeager
2008-12-22 18:13:29 UTC
It's not coincidental logic.



Everything is here for a reason. For example, humans are omnivores, but need teeth to grind vegetables and to tear meat, thus, teeth.



It's not a coincidence, it's just effectively working to solve a problem. For example, if you see a leak in a pipe, it's not a coincidence that you chose to fix it.
Allie Q
2008-12-22 18:25:40 UTC
The earth was not created for us. We adapted to survive on the earth. It's not all that miraculous. You are certainly free to believe it is. I, however, obviously do not see things the way you do. That does not make my way of thinking wrong and yours automatically right. It does not make me stupid or unable to grasp your point of view. I was a Christian once - I understand the Christian perspective quite well.
2008-12-22 18:14:32 UTC
Yes, if our environment was just slightly hotter/colder, more/less dense or radioactive, methane based instead or carbon or any other countless variables we can't even start to imagine, we would not be here... to see what was here.



This world was not created to fit our needs, we have evolved to survive in this world.
urban naturalist
2008-12-22 18:13:49 UTC
Wow, I can't believe how many people on this site have no basic knowledge of science. Is this entire field of study now gone from the curiculum?
novangelis
2008-12-22 18:19:49 UTC
We adapted to what is available. That is not coincidence.



The Earth did freeze over: see Cryogenian.



This is about the worst use of fallacy I have ever seen.
2008-12-22 18:21:52 UTC
Their idea of logic is that God isnt readily observable in nature. And most importantly; there is nothing that exists that is unobservable in nature. Thus they conclude God cannot possibly exist but it is only an assumption.
Doc Occam
2008-12-22 18:10:58 UTC
Your logic is like saying "If my legs were any shorter, my feet wouldn't touch the ground when I walk."



EDIT: So how did your legs KNOW to be the right length for your feet to touch the ground?
sweetjane
2008-12-22 18:10:27 UTC
The probability of a natural process is FAR greater than the probability of a mythical deity 'creating' all of this.
Weise Ente
2008-12-22 18:23:32 UTC
Except evolution explains every single point you raised. While you may accept it, I don't think you quite understand if fully.
qwertyuiop92
2008-12-22 18:09:43 UTC
not that big a coincidence, imagine how many millions of galaxies there are in the universe and in those how many planets and stars? that's billions of chances for there to be life
Kc
2008-12-22 18:10:12 UTC
You need to spend a little more time in science class.
manuel
2008-12-22 18:08:39 UTC
Is the Argument from Incredulity the best you can do?
Acid Zebra
2008-12-22 18:10:11 UTC
You still seem to think "our needs" are somehow important to the universe.
Necrolius
2008-12-22 18:17:30 UTC
If u looked at everything in its atomic state....................they are almost the same.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...