Atheist Universe: Chapter 4
Initially Posted: January 29, 2007
Contents:
2. Origin of the Universe: Natural or Supernatural?
3. God of the Gaps: Does the Universe Show Evidence of Design?
4. The “Miracle” of Planetary Clockwork
5. The “Miracle” of Life on Earth
6. Can Genesis Be Reconciled with Modern Science?
7. “Miracles” of Christian Perception
9. Christian Fundamentalists and the “Danger” of Internet Porn
10. Was America Really Founded upon Christian Principles?
11. “Intelligent Design”: Christianity’s Newest Cult
4. The “Miracle” of Planetary Clockwork:
Mills asserts that creationists believe God causes all of the planets in the solar system travel in perfect circular orbits around the sun 1 and that creationists believe the specific arrangement of planetary orbits in the solar system indicate “supernatural governance of the universe.” 2 However, he provided no footnotes, nor endnotes, so I am uncertain about which creationists he is referring to.
Mills asks: “Why, then doesn’t the solar system itself reveal evidence of intelligent design?” 3 He discusses how our solar system formed out of “an amorphous cloud of dust and gas called a nebula,” 4 “like hundreds of billions” 5 of other solar systems did. He also writes that this nebula is the result of a supernova’s recent explosion. A supernova is the final stage of a dying star.
In reality, our solar system DOES reveal evidence of intelligent design. Dr. Ross writes:
“Rocky planets couldn’t form and life chemistry wasn’t possible until at least two generations of stars had developed, burned, and exploded their nuclear ashes into interstellar space. Even then, adequate abundances of elements required some highly specialized circumstances. First, production of the full range of life-essential elements in as short a time as 9.5 billion years (the time of Earth’s formation) required the well-timed occurrence of three types of supernovae (relatively rare, massive stellar explosions) in proximity to one another: a type I, a normal type II, and an especially rare species of type II. Each produced a different suite of heavy elements.
Second, the three types of supernovae had to detonate not only close to one another but also near the gas and dust cloud where the sun had begun to coalesce. If one of them had exploded too close to this emerging solar nebula, that supernova would have blown the solar nebula apart, and no rocky planets capable of sustaining life could have formed. Any supernova that exploded too far away from the solar nebula would not have provided enough enrichment of certain heavy elements critical for advanced life chemistry.
Third, the timing of the three supernovae eruptions required precise orchestration. If any of them had exploded either too early or too late (relative to the emerging solar nebula) too few heavy elements from the three supernovae would have been incorporated into the solar nebula.
The level of fine-tuning necessary to explain the localized availability and adequate quantities of all advanced-life-essential heavy elements so early in cosmic history defies all probability. The odds of such a coincidence would be about the same as those of an explosion in a bicycle factory flinging out onto a sidewalk a block away, right in front of a cyclist, all the parts needed to assemble a new bicycle without doing any harm or damage to the parts, the cyclist, or the sidewalk.” 6
Mills limits his analysis to the solar system, which is strange, because he claims a “Miracle Worker” is not necessary since the laws of physics “perform all the work within our universe.” 7 Mills provides no evidence to support his assertion that a “Miracle Worker” has not directly interacted with the entire universe.
Mills ignores a vast quantity of data regarding the special conditions that permit carbon-based life, including humans, to exist in the universe as a whole. I find this extremely odd considering Mills lists Dr. Ross’ book The Creator and the Cosmos: How the Latest Scientific Discoveries Reveal God. Third Expanded Edition in the bibliography section on page 263 in Atheist Universe: The Thinking Person’s Answer to Christian Fundamentalism. Similar information can be found on pages 127-135 of The Case for a Creator: A Journalist Investigates Scientific Evidence That Points Toward God, by Lee Strobel. Curiously, Mills also lists this book in the bibliography section on page 263 of Atheist Universe.
However, he does inquire: “Of what benefit to mankind are the other hundred-billion galaxies?” 8 He also inquires: “For what purpose, then, did God create the other planets and stars?” 9
Dr. Ross provides an answer to these questions. He writes:
“Recent discoveries, however, provide at least two life-essential reasons for the enormity of the universe. First, the density of the protons and neutrons in the universe (cosmic baryon density) must be fine-tuned to support the nuclear fusion that in turn produces life’s required elements. With a slightly lower baryon density (producing fewer than about 10 billion trillion observable stars), nuclear fusion would be less productive and the cosmos would be incapable of generating elements heavier than helium. Or, if the baryon density were slightly higher (producing more that about 10 billion trillion observable stars), nuclear fusion would be more productive and all the elements would quickly become as heavy as, or heavier than, iron. Either way, life-essential elements such as carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus, and potassium would not exist.
Second, the total cosmic mass density (density of baryons plus density of exotic mass particles in the universe) plays a key role in determining the cosmic expansion rate. If the cosmic mass density were very slightly lower, gravity would be too weak to apply much braking to the cosmic expansion. The universe would expand so rapidly that matter couldn’t coalesce into galaxies, stars, and planets. Life would have no home.
With a cosmic mass density very slightly greater, gravity’s powerful grip would soon have collapsed all the mass of the universe into black holes and neutron stars. With a minimum density (inside or on black holes and neutron stars) of 5 billion tons per teaspoonful, such a universe would not permit atoms to exist, much less allow the existence or the assembly of life molecules.” 10
Mills mentions that the occurrence of reversals in Earth’s magnetic field argue against a Creator, because these reversals indicate Earth’s magnetic field is not “regular” or constant. 11 He is correct to say these magnetic reversals occur. However, Mills neglects to mention that Earth’s magnetic field itself appears to be “fine-tuned.” For example, if it was stronger, electromagnetic storms would be too severe, but if it were weaker, Earth’s ozone shield would be inadequately protected from hard stellar and solar radiation.12 Earth’s magnetic field has also helped scientists make scientific discoveries as a result of its “irregularities.” 13
Mills also claims: “The Creator could also have established orbits with a middle-of-the road 45-degree inclination, or any combination in-between.” 14 He asks: “Why, then, was the Creator so strikingly uncreative in His choice of planetary orbits? Why did the Creator so camouflage his miraculous orbital designs as to precisely mimic naturally occurring orbits?” 15 In reality, Earth’s orbit exhibits “fine-tuning.” If the inclination of Earth’s orbit was too great, temperature differences on the planet would be too extreme. 16 Also, if Earth’s orbital eccentricity was too great, seasonal temperature differences would be too extreme. 17
Mills concludes this chapter by implying there is no evidence left to substantiate belief in God’s existence, and writing that modern creationism has very little to do with science. 18
Endnotes:
1. David Mills, Atheist Universe: The Thinking Person’s Answer to Christian Fundamentalism (Berkeley, CA: Ulysses Press, 2006), 97.
2. David Mills, Atheist Universe: The Thinking Person’s Answer to Christian Fundamentalism (Berkeley, CA: Ulysses Press, 2006), 92.
3. David Mills, Atheist Universe: The Thinking Person’s Answer to Christian Fundamentalism (Berkeley, CA: Ulysses Press, 2006), 94.
4. David Mills, Atheist Universe: The Thinking Person’s Answer to Christian Fundamentalism (Berkeley, CA: Ulysses Press, 2006), 94.
5. David Mills, Atheist Universe: The Thinking Person’s Answer to Christian Fundamentalism (Berkeley, CA: Ulysses Press, 2006), 94.
6. Hugh Ross, Creation as Science: A Testable Model Approach to End the Creation/Evolution Wars (Colorado Springs, CO: NAVPRESS, 2006), 103.
7. David Mills, Atheist Universe: The Thinking Person’s Answer to Christian Fundamentalism (Berkeley, CA: Ulysses Press, 2006), 103.
8. David Mills, Atheist Universe: The Thinking Person’s Answer to Christian Fundamentalism (Berkeley, CA: Ulysses Press, 2006), 98.
9. David Mills, Atheist Universe: The Thinking Person’s Answer to Christian Fundamentalism (Berkeley, CA: Ulysses Press, 2006), 98.
10. Hugh Ross, Creation as Science: A Testable Model Approach to End the Creation/Evolution Wars (Colorado Springs, CO: NAVPRESS, 2006), 95.
11. David Mills, Atheist Universe: The Thinking Person’s Answer to Christian Fundamentalism (Berkeley, CA: Ulysses Press, 2006), 98, 99.
12. Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos. Third Expanded Edition (Colorado Springs, CO: NAVPRESS, 2001), 190.
13. Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay W. Richards, The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for Discovery (Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2004), 54.
14. David Mills, Atheist Universe: The Thinking Person’s Answer to Christian Fundamentalism (Berkeley, CA: Ulysses Press, 2006), 102.
15. David Mills, Atheist Universe: The Thinking Person’s Answer to Christian Fundamentalism (Berkeley, CA: Ulysses Press, 2006), 102.
16. Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos. Third Expanded Edition (Colorado Springs, CO: NAVPRESS, 2001), 190.
17. Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos. Third Expanded Edition (Colorado Springs, CO: NAVPRESS, 2001), 190.
18. David Mills, Atheist Universe: The Thinking Person’s Answer to Christian Fundamentalism (Berkeley, CA: Ulysses Press, 2006), 104.