He doesn't say "it is clear" because then he'd have to give proof. Instead he says "to me it's clear". Strictly belief.
Given the man's status, history and credibility he summed it up in one sentence.
“I have concluded that we are in a world made by rules created by an intelligence. Believe me, everything that we call chance today won’t make sense anymore,” Kaku began. “To me, it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance.”
In layman's terms: You see a beautiful painting... you know there had to be a creator. You know this could not have assembled itself by chance. The same reasoning with a watch. No way on earth it assembles itself without an intelligent creator. But now he is talking about the creative blocks of life and how it is sustained, far more complex than a painting. And he is saying to atheist evolutionists, "no way possible this could ever have occurred and evolved without a supreme intelligence."
And those who so want God not to be real resist and mock. - - - - and choose to believe in the impossible. A perfect example of pride being the folly of man.
So you run to your heroes for comfort. Because they are worse than you when it comes to sheer arrogance and pride. None more famous than Richard Dawkins who famously said in his book "The Blind Watchmaker" - - - -
"Natural selection is the blind watchmaker, blind because it does not see ahead, does not plan consequences, has no purpose in view. Yet the living results of natural selection overwhelmingly impress us with the appearance of design as if by a master watchmaker, impress us with the illusion of design and planning.”
“the illusion of design.” --- right. That’s not science… that is agenda. And everyone knows it.
What created god? If you describe god to me it seems alive and beautiful too just like the universe. So, what created god? God is the clock. So what intelligently designed god?
The First Cause Argument, or
Cosmological Argument, is
internally contradictory and raises the following questions: Who or what created god?, Why should a hypothetical ‘cause’ have any of the common attributes of a god? Why can’t the universe be causeless too? and, most importantly, Why rule out all other
possible explanations?
It is fundamentally a
‘god of the gaps’ approach. Our current lack of understanding concerning the Universe’s origins
does not automatically mean ‘god’ holds any explanatory value. Metaphysical and theistic speculation
are not immediately justified or correct simply because we lack a comprehensive scientific model. Uncertainty is the most
valid position and one can honestly say “We just don’t know yet”.
The argument ignores the fact that our everyday understanding of causality has been arrived at via
a posteriori inductive reasoning – which means it might not apply to everything. Time, for instance, appears to have begun with the Big Bang, so there might not have been any ’cause’ for the Universe to be an ‘effect’ of since there was probably
no time for a ’cause’ to exist in. Applying concepts like time and causality to the Big Bang might be comparable to asking “What is north of the North Pole?” – ultimately nonsensical and incoherent. Furthermore, even if causality could be established it would not immediately imply the existence of a god, much less any
particular one, as the properties and nature of the ’cause’ could forever remain a mystery or be
naturalistic.
In fact, something can come from nothing and we are able to
observe it in the form of
virtual particles and
quantum vacuum fluctuations. They explain why the early universe lacked uniformity and provided the seeds for the
emergence of structure. These quantum phenomena are also causeless in the sense that they are objectively and irreducibly
random, a fact confirmed by tests of
non-local realism and
Bell’s Theorem.
Note 1: Theists often state “God is outside of time”. This claim does not actually make their speculation correct. Instead, it brings with it a whole
host of problems and may be immediately dismissed as being without basis and a type fallacy known as
special pleading.
Note 2:
Cosmogony is the scientific study of the origins of the universe.
See also:
Carl Sagan on the topic (a must watch),
Hitchens, Hawking –
Did God Create the Universe? (a must watch), BBC Horizon –
What happened before the big bang?, BBC
Nothing (a must watch) and
‘A Universe From Nothing’ by Lawrence Krauss (a must watch).
