I believe that it's more interesting how I arrive at an answer, than what my answer actually is. In an attempt to find an answer, I'll ask two questions:
- "What would the universe be like if it was caused by a random big bang, and life evolved through natural selection?"
- "What would the universe be like if it was created?"
The answer to the question that I was asked is then simply, "Which answer is more like the universe?"
I want to answer these questions about the universe as if man-made technology didn't exist, as this is about the origin of man, not what man has made, so I'll attempt to base my answers on what life prior to technology would have been like.
But, before I start, it may be worthwhile to think about what a creator would be like. He / she / it would be extremely intelligent and advanced, or at least use technology that is. It may be conscious or an intelligent machine. We know is that its desire would be to create life, and therefore I would guess its reason would be to create happiness.
Natural selection has no motivation. Any life form existing by natural selection exists due to the life form's abilities to survive and reproduce. Natural selection might achieve these by selecting happiness and pain, as life forms experiencing the right emotions in the right scenarios would likely survive and reproduce better than others. These emotions would be extremely difficult to override, as overriding them would override the survival and reproduction instincts.
So, my first thought is that, in a random world, both pain and happiness might be roughly equal, whereas a created world would likely be more heaven-like.
It is possible that the creator decided that the universe should appear to be random, choosing to do everything it possibly could to make it appear that it didn't exist. If this is the case, then the outcome of these questions should make it seem like natural selection is the most likely, but the real answer would be a creator. Of course in this unlikely scenario, we would have zero evidence for a creator, and therefore no reason to believe that life was created.
Below are my thoughts:
| Natural Selection | Creation |
|---|---|
| Roughly equal spread of happiness and pain. | No reason for pain to exist. All life forms would probably be happy. |
| It seems to me that there is an equal spread of happiness and pain, but perhaps there was a lot more pain in the past when people lived in caves without heating or running water, or any of today's man-made luxuries. Constant happiness appears to be almost impossible to attain. Much of nature seems to cause pain: Viruses, harmful bacteria, disease, e.g. coronavirus, smallpox, HIV, measles, the flu, colds, TB, bubonic plague, malaria, mould, cancer, etc. Harmful animals, e.g. snakes, spiders, lions, scorpions, mosquitoes, etc. "Acts of God", e.g. floods, drought, earth quakes, tornadoes, volcanoes, tsunamis, etc. Poisonous plants, like some mushrooms, etc. The concept of the food chain is brutal, and I can't imagine that there is a particularly large amount of happiness in the life of the average animal. | |
| Reproduction / life forms copying themselves, with slight imperfections / variations is an essential element of natural selection. Death, also is a useful part of natural selection, as it selects out those life forms less capable of surviving. | No reason for reproduction. The creator would likely create all life. Death is probably unnecessary. |
| An estimated one in eight pregnancies end in miscarriage. The chance of dying while giving birth used to be quite high. Many people are born with defects. Most are not as good looking as they'd like to be. Death obviously exists. | |
| Life would be positioned in seemingly random locations in a highly varied universe, where conditions were stable enough for life to persist. | Life would likely be positioned in the centre, or spread evenly across a universe that would only be as big as it needs to be. |
| One estimate of the number of stars in the universe is 200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. Earth is not all there is. Earth is not the centre of our solar system, nor the centre of the Milky Way, nor the centre of the universe. It is ridiculously insignificant in terms of size and position. In a dangerous universe, due to seemingly random conditions, Earth is mostly protected from frequent significant meteorite collisions, which could have allowed life to survive as long as it has. The last major meteorite collision was 66 million years ago. | |
| Scientific research, using processes designed to eliminate bias, would reveal natural selection, with life evolving over a long period of time, with simpler life forms arriving first. | Scientific research, using process designed to eliminate bias, would reveal creation, most likely at a single point in time. |
| Experts in astronomy, biology, physics, theoretical physics and geology seem to agree (or at least have compatible deductions) on most aspects of the origin of the universe and life: The universe is approximately 13.8 billion years old. Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. The earliest evidence of life is that life existed 3.77 to 4.5 billion years ago. The earliest fossil evidence of early Homo sapiens appearing indicates that humans existed around 300,000 years ago. | |
| The system would have consistent, predictable physics. No intervention would exist, and we'd have to solve all problems by ourselves. | While it is possible that the creator would have created an environment that was entirely self-sufficient, it is possible that the creator would choose to interact with the life that it created, perhaps communicating with the life, or making alterations within the universe. |
| As we learn more about how things work we discover that rain is not sent by a deity, nor is lightning, nor rainbows, nor sickness. Everything has a physical cause and effect: evaporation, condensation, static electricity, refraction, viruses. No deity is in attendance at World Health Organization meetings, nor United Nations meetings, nor those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. We never see headlines showing an intervention, such as a creator choosing to cancel a disease. | |
In conclusion, to answer the questions:
Q: What would the universe be like if it was caused by a random big bang, and life evolved through natural selection?
A: Exactly as it is.
Q: What would the universe be like if it was created?
A: Obviously, quite a lot different to this one.
I cannot think of anything that makes creation seem more likely than evolution.
As for why so many people believe in a creator; I think the answer can be found in psychology. It is a matter of natural selection of beliefs: Since Christians and Muslims are terrified of the idea that not believing will end in eternal torture, and passionate about the idea that believing and obeying will result in eternal happiness, it's no wonder that their beliefs are thriving. We are not perfectly rational. Our minds exist to survive and reproduce, not to solve mathematical and logic puzzles. We think with our emotions, and search for evidence to back our beliefs, ignoring the mountain of evidence against them, making excuses for the contradictions and logic problems in our convictions.
