Shit man, im a natural born killer!

[Cyberman]

---

I accept that you see the beauty in mountains, trees, rivers, stars etc. But beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The real question is do you see the physics in all those things? For example, stars are not simply dots of light forming pretty patterns in the sky. They are mindbogglingly immense nuclear fusion reactors held together by their own gravity; with the obvious exception of our own familiar Sun, exactly 100% of them are so far away from our world that, barring some technological paradigm shift, they are forever beyond our reach. What's more, there are 100,000,000,000 of them in our Galaxy alone - and there are literally trillions of other galaxies out there in the Universe, with more being discovered all the time. And all of this is to give us something beautiful to look at at night?

We can indeed look at trees and other similar biological entities in the natural environment and remark on how pretty they are. What we fail to appreciate by so doing is the continuous battle for survival these things represent. "Nature red in tooth and claw" isn't just a poetic turn of phrase. An idyllic woodland scene straight off a Hallmark birthday card is Nature's equivalent of the trenches of the Somme.

My whole point is that none of these things exist simply for our aesthetic sensibilities. If the natural world suggests a god to you because you think they do, that it's all for our purposes, you're missing the bigger picture. It's like playing a piano with eighty-seven missing keys. To quote a famous philosopher, "That is why you fail."

---

Stimbo- Good day to you sir, To answer your question, I do indeed see the physics in all of it. Just because im a believer in god does not mean i dont believe in science. I think God is the O.G. scientist and science is his vehicle for bringing it all to existance. Also i dont believe that all this is here soley for our enjoyment. You have a great way of looking at things, how you described an idyllic woodland scene...so true.

It suggests that there is a god to me simply because of all the complexity of it. For all of it to just simply happen because it did is impossible for me to accept. Thanks for your reply brother.

Point of clarification before I begin: science is not a 'thing' that one can believe in. Science is a process, a method of investigation that adds to the body of human knowledge. If a scientist states that complex organism developed from earlier, simpler ones, that is not the end of the process. Rather, it is only the first step of a very long and often painful journey.

Anyway, now that's out of the way: Let's assume for the moment that a god is necessary for things to exist. I'm not going to limit the thought experiment simply to "God" because even if god/s exist and are active in the Universe, or even if they're not, that particularly identity is another level of detail that you have to establish. In other words, why God and not, say, Zeus, Ra, or Tengri, the creator god of the Göktürks (look it up)? For the moment we're going to posit a bog-standard creator god. A celestial scientist, if you like. This god created all things. The question now becomes: how? By what methods? If you watched PotHoler54's video I gave you earlier, you will have seen a method (if not actually 'the' method) by which achingly primitive biochemistry formed from the primordial landscape. These early chemical compounds polymerised into more complex compounds, which they can be observed to do when left to their own devices. Natural selection soon gets to work and like a sculptor, chips away everything that doesn't deserve to be there by virtue of suitability to the environment. The rest is history (well, chemistry and eventually biology, but you get the idea I hope).

So to reiterate PotHoler's question from that video, if a god did step in, at what point? And why, if the process can do the job all by itself, which we know from observation is what does happen?

To sum up: Try to disavow yourself of the idea that things sans a god had to happen by themselves because they did and thus is unbelievable. Instead, consider that things happened because they can.