# Is the existence of a Creator just more sensical? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 18, 2009, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867 "2009-01-18T16:52:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![CalD](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7feea3/32.png) [@CalD](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalD)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/101 "2009-01-18T18:58:04Z")
> [@Q.E.D](#): > > This doesn’t make any sense. How can any being see everything at once and still make sense of it? Take a movie and cut the frames apart and stack them in order, then project the whole on a screen. You’re looking at the whole movie, all at once. Now, how do you make sense of it? How do you describe the interactions between the characters? _We_ couldn’t, but we’re human. Why are you placing human constraints on the Creator? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/102 "2009-01-18T19:01:19Z")
How does a Creator who exists outside of time DO anything? Doing requires change. Change requires time. If the Creator is really timeless then he can’t actually create anything. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/103 "2009-01-18T19:01:33Z")
> [@CalD](#): > > Hold on. > > I was responding to Qadgop’s claim: > > The facts as understood so far include the observation of the atom’s complexity. > > So, given that awe-inspiring structure, complexity and functionality doesn’t count for evidence of an intelligent designer all by itself, I want to know if there is any level of structure, design and functionality that _would_. Singing and dancing atoms? Would that do it? Or would the likes of Qadgop accept NO amount of complexity/functionality as evidence? What you seem utterly unaware of and (apparently remain oblivious to attempts at correction) is that the atom is entirely explicable in terms of natural physical processes. The fact that you personally can’t understand it doesn’t mean it’s magic. ---
**Author:** ![CalD](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7feea3/32.png) [@CalD](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalD)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/104 "2009-01-18T19:01:45Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I don’t really know what you mean by this. If you’retrying to say that some things in the universe look “designed” to you on a purely superficial level, then all I can say is so what? What does that prove? I can tell you that closer inspection has never born that perception out ( a perception I’ve never personally shared, incidentally, so it’s not universal). Well, I am trying to state my hypothesis as clearly as I can: The atom’s structure, functionality and complexity are amazing, are they not? So amazing that you’d almost have to believe there is evidence of design in there? I believe so. For those who don’t believe so, my question stands: How much structure/complexity/functionality _would_ you accept as evidence of a designer? ---
**Author:** ![CalD](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7feea3/32.png) [@CalD](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalD)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/105 "2009-01-18T19:04:03Z")
> [@CaerieD](#): > > There was no need for this list to account of “the possibility that atoms weren’t created through natural means.” This list had nothing to do with such philosophy. Aha.. so this list which doesn’t allow for the possibility of an intelligent creator, is somehow going to be evidence that there isn’t an intelligent creator when it inevitably doesn’t find one? ---
**Author:** ![CalD](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7feea3/32.png) [@CalD](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalD)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/106 "2009-01-18T19:05:44Z")
> [@Pochacco](#): > > An uncreated universe is more plausible than an uncreated Creator. Well that settles it. ?? At least _try_ and give something other than an unqualified assertion, debates would go nowhere if all each party did was simply assert their positions at each other. ---
**Author:** ![CalD](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7feea3/32.png) [@CalD](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalD)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/107 "2009-01-18T19:07:45Z")
Apologies to those I didn’t get a chance to respond to tonight, hopefully there’ll be time tomorrow. Good night. ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/108 "2009-01-18T19:08:07Z")
> [@CalD](#): > > The atom’s structure, functionality and complexity are amazing, are they not? No, they aren’t. An atom is stupidly simple, actually. It’s a bunch of protons and neutrons bound together by the strong nuclear force, surrounded by electrons which are attracted by the opposite electrical charge. You can throw all these things together, smack them around a bit and you’ll wind up with some atoms, mostly of hydrogen. Add some pressure and heat and these hydrogen atoms are crushed together to make heavier atoms. Lather, rinse, repeat. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/109 "2009-01-18T19:09:07Z")
> [@CalD](#): > > Well that settles it. We have evidence for the existence of universes. We have no evidence for the existence of Creators. So an uncreated universe is more plausible than an uncreated Creator. QED. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/110 "2009-01-18T19:13:34Z")
> [@CalD](#): > > Well, I am trying to state my hypothesis as clearly as I can: > > The atom’s structure, functionality and complexity are amazing, are they not? I don’t know from “amazing.” That’s just subjective emotion, and it’s neither here nor there. The question is whether it’s explicable in terms of natural processes, and it is. ---
**Author:** ![Diz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/87869e/32.png) [@Diz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diz)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/111 "2009-01-18T19:16:17Z")
> [@CalD](#): > > I said it makes more sense, when we look at how magnificently complex, structured and functional an atom is. I challenge this assertion. Atoms are not complex. They are composed of quarks and electrons whose interactions are solely governed by the four fundamental forces. They have a small number of components with a very limited way of joining together. Any apparent structure is a result of those limits. This does not fit any definition of ‘complex’ that I am aware of. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/112 "2009-01-18T19:21:37Z")
Moving thread from IMHO to Great Debates. ---
**Author:** ![CaerieD](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/da6949/32.png) [@CaerieD](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CaerieD)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/113 "2009-01-18T19:22:08Z")
> [@CalD](#): > > Aha.. so this list which doesn’t allow for the possibility of an intelligent creator, is somehow going to be evidence that there isn’t an intelligent creator when it inevitably doesn’t find one? Alright, let me explain it like so: I hear a noise in my attic. Living in northern Wisconsin, I can think of a number of different animals that live here that could be the cause of the sound, along with the possibility of wind or some mechanical action. Investigation shows me evidence that this sound is caused by some bats. I did not make allowances in my hypothesis of what could be causing the sound for sky fairies, but this doesn’t mean that there is still the possibility that sky fairies were causing the sound. I _discovered_ the cause of the sound. The same can be said for what creates atoms. Scientists didn’t make allowances in their hypotheses that God did it. Once sufficient proof was found as to what caused the formation of atoms, there was _no further need to say_, “Uh, maybe God did it.” Once an explanation has been found there’s no reason to toss out additional complications. A simple explanation that accounts for all observable evidence will do. ---
**Author:** ![Half\_Man\_Half\_Wit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/half_man_half_wit/32/21766_2.png) [@Half\_Man\_Half\_Wit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Half_Man_Half_Wit)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/114 "2009-01-18T19:24:27Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Moving thread from IMHO to Great Debates. Is it really a debate if one side consists of only one person using only the ‘la la la I can’t hear you!’-argument? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/115 "2009-01-18T19:30:10Z")
> [@Half\_Man\_Half\_Wit](#): > > Is it really a debate if one side consists of only one person using only the ‘la la la I can’t hear you!’-argument? Not my problem now, is it? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/116 "2009-01-18T19:49:22Z")
> [@Captain\_Carrot](#): > > Not to me, it doesn’t. That’s the problem with the “doesn’t it just seem like this to you?” arguments: to a lot of people, it _doesn’t_ just seem like that. Also, the basic building block is arguably the quark, not the atom. I don’t think the quark qualifies either–not as THE builiding block. Leptons–that is, electrons, muons, neutrons, & such–do not consist of quarks; nor do photons. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/117 "2009-01-18T19:55:14Z")
> [@CalD](#): > > At least _try_ and give something other than an unqualified assertion, Why? That’s all you’re doing. > [@CalD](#): > > debates would go nowhere if all each party did was simply assert their positions at each other. Oh, the irony… ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/118 "2009-01-18T20:02:40Z")
> [@CalD](#): > > When you look at a bicycle, do you believe that _mere observation of the bike alone_ doesn’t even **lean** towards the likelihood of a designer? If I’d never seen or even heard of a bicycle before, I’m pretty sure I could still recognize one as being a kind of machine designed and constructed by humans. That’s because the bicycle has several characteristics in common with other man-made objects (e.g. wheels), characteristics that are not shared by plants, animals, rocks, etc. In other words, I could recognize a bicycle as being designed by an intelligent being because it is different from the many objects in the world that are NOT designed by an intelligent being. If everything in the world really looked like it was intelligently designed, I’d have no reason to suspect that the bicycle was a man-made object. It could just as plausibly be a naturally occurring mineral formation or something. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/119 "2009-01-18T20:16:11Z")
By what measure of complexity is the atom a complex thing? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867/120 "2009-01-18T20:19:55Z")
> [@CalD](#): > > _We_ couldn’t, but we’re human. > > Why are you placing human constraints on the Creator? Which creator? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-existence-of-a-creator-just-more-sensical/481867.md?page=7)