Return of the God Hypothesis: Three Scientific Discoveries That Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe

Product Information

In the future, some young person is going to laugh when someone mentions “God,” because he read Stephen Meyer and knows how that turned out.

This book is the crowning opus in a masterful and transformative trilogy in which Stephen Meyer challenges the pretensions of presumptive naturalism in science. As Meyer shows, the God hypothesis is indispensable to science. Its return, and the re-enchantment of the world with it, is most welcome. Bruce L. Gordon, Ph.D. in Philosophy of Physics, Northwestern University; Professor, History and Philosophy of Science, Houston Baptist University Third, though Newton affirmed these powers of God, he did not postulate occasional, special, or singular acts of God in place of a law-like description of planetary motion or to remedy irregularities in the laws of nature or to fix an unstable planetary system. Newton thought that God was responsible on an ongoing basis for the mathematical regularities evident in nature, not fixing irregularities or rectifying instabilities [emphasis in original]” (p. 429; see also p. 518). To make their case for the adequacy of a strictly materialistic approach to explanation in science and philosophy, defenders of this approach must first show that “gaps” in our knowledge of the materialistic causes of key events in the history of life and the universe can be filled with knowledge of an actual materialistic process capable of producing the events in question. (p. 613).” I find Meyer’s defense of each of these claims wanting, but, before I critique them, let me make two brief comments, one about the nature of Meyer’s three claims, and the other about the overall thesis of his book. The problem with this is that the supernatural explanation he offers is unfalsifiable. What happens if, subsequent to that, another naturalistic explanation is presented that has not yet been falsified?Desperate attempts have also been made by influential cosmologists to avoid the obvious theistic implications of a universe that had a definite beginning. In particular, Meyer uses his considerable skills in philosophy to debunk the lofty-sounding proclamations of celebrity cosmologists such as Lawrence Krauss, the late Stephen Hawking, and others, who have sold millions of books with headline-grabbing titles like A Universe from Nothing and The Grand Design. Note that this is subtly different from a probability argument. The argument is that it is the consistency of our experience regarding the origin of artificially encoded information that compels us to accept an intelligent origin of apparently naturally occurring encoded information.

from the beginning (or shortly thereafter), various physical constants have had values that are unlikely to have arisen by chance – that the universe appears to be “fine-tuned”; and Meyer lays out similar devastating arguments against other theorists who have waded in on this issue, especially Lawrence Krauss and Max Tegmark. Above all, Meyer shows that while these men may be brilliant scientists, they turn out to be very poor philosophers.

Privacy & Content Ownership

I’m not going to play word games with SA, but I’m going to make a comment about arguments from ignorance, and why what Meyer is doing should be considered an example of such an argument.

Some non-sentient but unknown natural mechanism, of which we are as yet completely and utterly unaware, established the conditions under which our observable universe exists and the life within it flourishes.” A comprehensive and lucid argument for theism as the best explanation for the scientific evidence. Stephen Meyer has a true gift for conveying complex concepts clearly. Dr. Robert Kaita, former Principal Research Physicist, Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory. A hundred years ago our best and brightest argued over whether our galaxy was the only one, and whether the universe was older than we now know our own planet to be. We knew a lot – and, it turns out, we knew almost nothing. It is, therefore, our uniform and repeated experience that such encoding is the product of intelligence.In particular, to the extent that the apparent fine-tuning of constants related to gravitational attraction is prominent in these examples – and it is – we should be particularly careful, as our best quantum theories still struggle to incorporate gravity, and especially under the exotic conditions of the early universe. This magnum opus is a must-read for students, historians of science, philosophers, theologians and scientists. Meyer’s scientific arguments supporting the God hypothesis are thoroughly and convincingly presented; counterarguments are objectively presented with equal clarity, and forthrightly rebutted with compelling reasoning and evidence. His philosophical arguments are equally compelling and will inevitably have an indelible impact on the worldview of the reader. Stephen Meyer is one of the finest minds in this field and with this work he has done a great service to science and society. Dr. Frik van Niekerk, Nuclear Engineer, Faculty of Engineering, Northwest University, South Africa