Mageth

It's a meaningless question. Either an uncreated God created everything or He didn't. Probability is meaningless, because we have no way of knowing what all the rules are/were, or what the components were.

If probability is meaningless, then do you consider abiogenesis on equal footing with god as an explanation?

But I disagree that we have "no way of knowing what all the rules are/were, or what the components were." We may indeed at some point in the future know all that.

Mageth

Complexity in and of itself isn't nearly good enough. What were looking for, at the very least, is intelligence.

I consider intelligence as an emergent phenomenon of complexity in the universe. In a sense, a form or product of complexity itself. Thus, I think caravelair's statement "no creator is necessary to explain them, and thus no creator is necessary to explain the complexity of the universe" covers intelligence as well.

Mageth

This, surely, is spoken with a degree of enlightenment comparable to the person who thinks he makes a light bulb glow by turning on a switch, oblivious to the power plant and transmission lines that energize the bulb.

Go manufacture some gravity, EMF, or matter and get back to me.

But that's exactly what you're claiming god did, if I'm reading you right.

So I'll ask you: go get god to manufacture some gravity, EMF, or matter and get back to me.

yguy

Not even close, because it doesn't make sense to me.

yguy

You better believe it.

He already did.

caravelair

i was addressing the idea that complexity requires an intelligent designer, so i believe that my example of complexity was quite sufficient. if you're arguing that only intelligence begets intelligence, that is a completely separate argument, and a pretty bad one at that.

i'm not saying that the properties of the universe simply appeared. but the properties are not complex, so the whole "complexity requires an intelligent designer" argument would not be relevant to such simple things. so i can't create a fundamental force... so what? what does that have to do with anything? there's lots of things i can't do, despite my ability to intelligently design things.

caravelair

the fact that you lack understanding of the theory is completely irrelevant to whether or not it is correct.

yguy

I think that's preposterous, considering how pathetic our focussed efforts to produce AI have been. Why would anyone think happenstance would generate it?

yguy

What it could possibly have been sufficient for escapes me.

This is intellectual presumption beyond belief. You think you understand gravity because you know some of its effects, which is like thinking you understand cars because you can drive one.

Mageth

Not even close, because it doesn't make sense to me.

Well, discussion over then; it's a done deal. If it doesn't make sense to yguy, it can't be true.