Index to Creationist Claims,  edited by Mark Isaak,    Copyright © 2004

Previous Claim: CI301   |   List of Claims   |   Next Claim: CI401

---

Claim CI302:

Source:

Response:

1. People tend to start with the easy stuff, and scientists are no different. The discoveries they have made would naturally tend to fall in the areas where discovery is easiest.
   
   When airline traffic was halted for three days after the 9/11 attack, scientists took the opportunity to measure the effect of contrails (Travis et al. 2002). That does not mean the 9/11 attack was designed for scientific discovery. Likewise, the fact that scientists in general have taken what measurements they have does not mean the universe was designed to allow them to do so.
   
   
2. The argument boils down to the tautology "If things had been different, things would be different." There is no evidence that a different universe would be better or worse. Different conditions might make it harder to observe what is easy to observe now, but they would make other observations easier, probably leading to the discovery of things we do not yet know. The philosophy behind this claim was satirized by Voltaire (1759):

   "It is demonstrable," said he, "that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as all things have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for the best end. Observe, for instance, the nose is formed for spectacles, therefore we wear spectacles. The legs are visibly designed for stockings, accordingly we wear stockings. Stones were made to be hewn and to construct castles, therefore My Lord has a magnificent castle; for the greatest baron in the province ought to be the best lodged. Swine were intended to be eaten, therefore we eat pork all the year round: and they, who assert that everything is right, do not express themselves correctly; they should say that everything is best."

3. In many ways, the configuration of the universe hinders scientific discovery. For example:
   • Things in space are hard to get to. They are very far away; the intervening vacuum is hostile to life; our gravity well makes it costly to leave earth.
   • The speed of light would hinder communication when and if we ever do explore the galaxy.
   • Our life spans are too short to individually note many important changes in nature.
   • Nobody knows of any easy way to find the structure of proteins.
   • There appears to be no life on other planets with which to compare terran life.
   • Underwater exploration is quite inconvenient for us.
   • Our brains may be structured so that some things are difficult to understand. Many people, for example, cannot seem to comprehend that the question "What is outside the universe?" is meaningless. Quantum mechanics and relativity are also difficult to conceptualize. And the tendency to categorize things into distinct "kinds" may be biological. (It is helpful for language, but it hinders understanding of evolution.)
   
   
4. A universe whose laws are easy to discover implies a simple universe, but design theorists keep telling us how complex things are.
   
   
5. The importance of the 1919 eclipse in establishing the truth of relativity may be exaggerated (Collins 1998; see also Stanley 2003). General relativity, like most theories, was established by a variety of consistent observations.

References:

Further Reading: