One of the most common arguments I see being used by apologetics is the Fine-Tuned Argument. Simply put, it asserts that the conditions necessary to support life as it exists on Earth are so specific and narrowly defined, and the odds of such conditions emerging by random chance so remote, that the existence of a deliberate guiding force or creator may be inferred. Christian apologists naturally assert that this “guiding force” must be the particular god that they worship, without providing any evidence to validate that conclusion.
While reading Brian Greene’s The Hidden Reality I came across a great analogy that demonstrates the main faults in this argument:
The only special thing about being 93 million miles from the sun is that it yields a temperature range conducive to our being here. If the earth were much closer or much farther away from the sun, the temperature would be much hotter or colder, eliminating an essential ingredient of life: liquid water. This reveals the in-built bias. The very fact that we measure the distance from our planet to the sun mandates that the results we find must be within the limited range compatible with our existence. Otherwise, we wouldn’t be here to contemplate the earth’s distance from the sun.
If the earth were the only planet in the solar system, or the only planet in the universe, you might feel compelled to carry investigation further. Yes, you might say, I understand that my own existence is tied to explain why the earth happens to be suited at such a cozy, life-compatible position. Is it lucky coincidence? Is there a deeper explanation?
But the earth is not the only planet in the universe, let alone in the solar system. There are many others. And this fact casts such questions in a very different light. To see what I mean, imagine that you mistakenly think a particular shop carries only a single shoe size, and are so gleefully surprised when the salesman brings you a pair that fits perfectly. “Of all the possible shoe sizes”, you reflect, “it’s amazing that the single one they carry is mine. Is that just a lucky coincidence? Is there a deeper explanation?” But when you learn that the shop actually carries a wide range of sizes, the question evaporates. A universe with many plants, situated at a range of distances from their host star, provides a similar situation. Just as it’s no big surprise that among all the shoes in the shop there’s at least one pair that fits, so it’s no big surprise that among all the planets in all the solar systems in all the galaxies there’s at least one at the right distance from its host star to yield a climate conducive to out form of life. And it’s on one of those planets, of course, that we live. We simply couldn’t evolve or survive on the others.
We live on one of millions of planets found in the Milky Way galaxy. Scientists believe that there are thousands of planets in our galaxy alone that contain the conditions necessary for life to exist. Just last month, NASA announced that they had found not one, but seven Earth-sized planets orbiting a star that could potentially harbor life. Last year NASA’s Kepler mission confirmed the first near-Earth-size planet in the “habitable zone” around a sun very similar to our star. If we then calculate all the millions of other galaxies in the universe, each containing billions of planets, it’s mathematically improbable that our lowly little planet should be the only one that contains life. If we are to go one step further and look at the strong possibility of there being multiple universes (the topic of Greene’s book), then the probability factor goes up exponentially.
It’s unfortunate that the Fine-Tune Argument is still so prevalent, as it has been debunked numerous times by numerous cosmologists, physicists, and mathematicians. Yet Christian apologists (most of whom are not scientists) keep repackaging this fallacious argument and presenting it as irrefutable “proof” of God’s existence.
I think the main reason this argument keeps coming up is A) it plays into the Christian narrative of humans being the pinnacle of all nature; that this entire universe was created just for us. And B) it sounds very appealing and plausible to those who are scientifically illiterate and predisposed towards any argument that bolsters their religious beliefs.
The Fine-Tune argument is just another appeal to ignorance by theists attempting to validate unsubstantiated claims. It’s another variation on the all too common God of the Gaps argument – “We don’t fully understand something, so it must be God.” Apologists will likely continue use this argument, but Neil DeGrasse Tyson offers a wise warning to those who do:
“It doesn’t mean that if you don’t understand something and a community of physicists don’t understand it, that God did it. If that’s how you want it invoke you evidence for God, then God is an ever receding pocket of ignorance that is getting smaller and smaller as time goes on.”
Thanks for reading.