The New York Times bestselling author of Darwins Doubt, Stephen Meyer,presents groundbreaking scientific evidence of the existence of God, based on breakthroughs in physics, cosmology, and biology.
Beginning in the late 19th century, many intellectuals began to insist that scientific knowledge conflicts with traditional theistic beliefthat science and belief in God are at war. Philosopher of science Stephen Meyer challenges this view by examining three scientific discoveries with decidedly theistic implications. Building on the case for the intelligent design of life that he developed inSignature in the CellandDarwins Doubt, Meyer demonstrates how discoveries in cosmology and physics coupled with those in biology help to establish the identity of the designing intelligence behind life and the universe.
Meyer argues that theismwith its affirmation of a transcendent, intelligent and active creatorbest explains the evidence we have concerning biological and cosmological origins. Previously Meyer refrained from attempting to answer questions about who might have designed life. Now he provides an evidence based answer to perhaps the ultimate mystery of the universe. In so doing, he reveals a stunning conclusion: the data support not just the existence of an intelligent designer of some kindbut the existence of a personal God.
Return of the God Hypothesis: Three Scientific Discoveries That Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe
DOWNLOAD Return of the God Hypothesis: Three Scientific Discoveries That Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe
As with his previous books, Stephen Meyers latest book uses a rigorous process of elimination to assess competing worldviews about the origin of life.Atheism is eliminated as a poor explanation on the basis that evidence for the ‘ big bang’ implies that the universe had a beginning; which implies something or someone started everything off in the first place.Deism is eliminated because of the inability of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution to explain the transition from geochemistry to biochemistry , implying an intelligence intervened at at least one point in the earths geological past.Pantheism is eliminated for similar reasons as Atheism. The idea of ‘ space aliens ‘ engineering life else where and seeding it on earth, is also eliminated as these creatures would have needed to have been around before the universe existed to have started the ball rolling as it were.Alternatives such as a Universe from nothing , and the Multiverse hypothesis, are revealed as entirely hypothetical mathematical constructions ( as acknowledged by at least one of their authors ) these being based on equations which tacitly , if not explicitly, assume a beginning, which in turn has theological implications.Combined with facts from computing, that in our experience, intelligence is the only known generator of information rich super systems , such as those found in biological organisms from the DNA upwards ; and the only remaining credible explanation is assumed to be Theism, ie the God hypothesis.Please discard a one star review above stating that this book is nonsense because’ we cannot conclude that intelligent design is the best explanation as there are lots of other potential explanations apart from intelligent design all of which we may have yet to discover. ‘ If this were the case then neither evolution , special creation nor ANY OTHER explanation could be considered good explanations because of the infinite number of alternative hypotheses available.My only criticism of this book is that it is too technical in places for the average non science reader ; but excellent and a must read neverless. Well done Proff Meyer ! 0062071505 Meyer is never short on words and he never skims over topics but gives each one due respect. This book follows a similar pattern. It is wide ranging, thorough, accessible and prented irencally making it reader friendly. The writing flows and the arguments unfold naturally. It is well researched and evidenced. It presents a formidable challenge to would be naturalists/materialists exposing the weaknesses in such philosophies across the whole of science and it corrects many misunderstandings and misrepresentations of science, philosophy and theism along the way. But, the text goes further, presenting a coherent, cogent and evidence based argument for the God Hypothosis. I'm sure it will bring comfort and increased confidence to theists and provide a serious challenge to atheists and agnostics. Whether you are an atheist or theist you should read this book, if only to get a clearer understanding of the importance of theism to science and to understand how theists think and why they hold firmly to their worldview. 0062071505
I like the style of the book, it is like a personal narrative where Dr. Meyer walks us through the history of science. Through that narrative he develops a strong case demonstrating that the founders of modern science assumed the God Hypothesis and that gave raise to the 0062071505 I bought this book to find out if Meyer has lost the plot by going on about Christianity in short, religiosity. None of this is needed to accept a theistic conclusion, so it appears to me that Meyer has risked dropping the ball and short changing the ID movement by not keeping his head down about this; & leaving others to come to their own conclusions. Accepting theism as a powerful theoretical solution to the the Big Questions of Existence that materialism fails to answer adequately, does not require religious faith. The notion of ‘God creating us in his image’ a closing idea from a guy called Platinga, is simply guesswork and a no no from a rational perspective.One thing that strikes me is that Meyer appears to assume that death is final. He barely refers to consciousness as a possibly fundamental quality of the universe, but there is plenty of empirical evidence supporting consciousness surviving the death of the body, with numerous reputable scientists & others backing this possibility. To ignore this as ‘simply unwarranted’ is not unlike materialists refusing in principle to consider intelligent design theory. String theory with eleven dimensions but no evidence yes let’s talk about that! A single spiritual dimension for which there is empirical evidence. Well no, that doesn’t deserve comment (even though it may support a theistic conclusion!). I realise that spiritualism has gone out of fashion, but if consciousness really does survive the death of the body as the evidence suggests, the ball game Meyer has been writing about is altogether bigger and different from his thesis. However i do not wish to run this book down. There is a huge amount of valuable content in most of it. 0062071505 Working in a potato field, wartime land worker John Stewart Collis came up with the following reflections, (from his excellent book 'The Worm Forgives the Plough.) ' '' A mouse,'' said Walt Whitman, '' is enough to stagger sextillions of infidels'' Or a potato. What is an infidel? One who lacks faith. What creates faith? A miracle. How then can there be a faithless man found in the world? Because many men have cut off the nervous communication between the eye and the brain. In the madness of blindness they are at the mercy of intellectual nay sayers, theorists, theologians and other enemies of God. But it doesn't matter; in spite of them, faith is reborn whenever anyone chooses to take a good look at anything even a potato.'. And that is surely unanswerable. 0062071505 Sloppy, lazy science just like Signature in the Cell and Darwin's Doubt. This is something which clearly appeals to people who want there to be a God or Designer responsible for life in the universe. Unfortunately, the claims that the best inference is God or an intelligent designer simply does not wash. Meyer tries to explain in this and his previous books that we can eliminate reasons A B C and D as explanations for the appearance and, as a result, we can infer an intelligent designer as the best explanation by using human made machines as an analogy. Meyer does not think, as other real scientists would do that there could also be explanations or theories F G H, indeed there could be an infinite number of explanations, some potentially valid, others not valid but which can eventually be proved or disproved by scientific research. How exactly does a transcendent mind exist or work the first place? Meyer needs to explain this. Meyer is very fond of making question begging statements about other scientific research but there are plenty of questions to be begged about ID. Meyer also relies on his colleague Dembski's specified complexity to rule out life coming into existence and then developing into something complex by mutation and natural selection. However, this would only be valid if Meyer is fully appraised of ALL the environmental circumstances exiting on Earth at the time life first developed and then eliminating all possible scientific explanations before coming to the conclusion that there was a mind behind it all. As to the belief that an intelligent agent caused the beginning of the universe, could Meyer provide a little detail about how the Designer brought this about as well as how the 'designer' designed life? The same goes for his argument in Darwin's Doubt. He uses gaps in current scientific knowledge to infer design. To say that scientists have not yet discovered exactly what caused the Big Bang or brought life into existence as an excuse for ID supporters therefore for them to not need to say is just a cop out. If scientists support a designer of life or the universe they should have the evidence for it. Otherwise, it is just a cop out. I'm sure that in 10, 20, 50, 100 years time, ID supporters will still be complaining how the academic elite is suppressing the ID argument despite the number of ID books that have and will be published and are out there in the public domain Whenever new scientific evidence is discovered ID will always be able to push back and say that that discovery was caused by intelligent design, so they will never lose but at the same time will never be able to prove their own pseudoscience. 0062071505 No he terminado de leer el libro, pero por lo que he leido hasta el momento es evidente que los argumentos estan basados en datos duros y en todo se ajustan al metodo cientifico. 0062071505