fbpx
37.6 F
Spokane
Friday, March 29, 2024
HomeCommentaryAskAsk An Atheist: How can we explain fruit without a creator?

Ask An Atheist: How can we explain fruit without a creator?

Date:

Related stories

My Journey through Homelessness Part Five: Learning to Live Outside the Box

The value of my homeless experience lies not so much in having learned how to live outside — at least not in the geographical sense. The value of my homeless experience lies in having learned how to live outside the box.

Lost in Translation: Isn’t It Time We Moved Beyond a Fear-Based Repentance?

When I hear the kingdom is at hand, followed immediately by the command to repent, the good news is overshadowed by the fear that I’m not good enough to be part of the kingdom of God.

Inspiring Others: How Our Marriage Turned 50

As we prepare to celebrate 50 years there are so many thoughts and memories going through my head. I have joked about how I don't know how you've put up with me for this long, which is really true in a sense with my Irish enthusiasm and temper.

Taking the Road ‘Less Traveled by’ Has Made ‘All the Difference’

Pete Haug remembers hearing Robert Frost read his poem "The Road not Taken" 65 years ago. It reminded him of his spiritual journey out of the Christianity of his youth into choosing the Baha'i faith as an adult.

Ask an EOC: Can You Confess in Private to God but not in Church Confession and be Forgiven?

Concerning the sacrament of Confession, Christ directly gave the authority to his Church to remit or retain the sins of the penitent. 

Our Sponsors

spot_img
spot_img

What do you want to Ask an Atheist? Submit your questions online or fill out the form below.

By Jim Downard

How can we explain fruit without a creator? Let alone the problem of the first cause. Fruit has a protective shell that does not advantage the tree; it only benefits man. True science reveals the need for a creator — quantum physics’ biggest problem is determining how one thing happens over another.

SPO_House-ad_Ask-an-atheist_0425133The notion that the “protective shell” of fruits “does not advantage the tree” will be news to botanists, who have known for some time how the genetic diversity of plants often critically depends on as wide a dispersal mix as possible, and hardy coverings facilitate that by staying longer in the digestive tracts of those animals (distinctively vertebrates) that eat them.

The theoretical dynamics of this process have been worked out in detail, such as the 2003 analysis by Lewin et al. There has been considerable evolution of all this over time, of course, again covered in many science papers. Pedro Jordano is a nice 2010 overview of some of that work.

Two 2008 papers explore how known fossilized fruit forms related to past life: deep changes in dispersal strategies going back into dinosaur times and more recent (but still extinct now) megafauna examples.

The deep biological origins of fruit coverings from plant seed ovules has also been a subject of ongoing study, tracing back deep in plant evolution to the diversification of the MADS-Box gene cluster, work done only quite recently, such as this 2012 paper.

The leap from plant biology to the governing fabric of the universe is extreme, but let’s follow it anyway. The “problem of the first cause” is one of those persistent tempests in philosophical teapots.  The Universe could just as easily be an Uncaused Cause as any god(s) believers feel obliged to pencil in.  Whether or not any god(s) were involved in why there is the universe we can see, the details of what has been discovered offer scant support for any of the many religious candidates offered for them.

For example, the sun, moon and stars are not even slightly younger than the Earth and plant life, as the Biblical Genesis tale stipulates for the fourth creation day (a story not even originally wrong, but an error cribbed second hand from the Mesopotamian creation stories worked into biblical lore during the Babylonian Captivity).

I have delved into a lot of these matters in the “Dinomania” (on the zany world of Young Earth Creationism) and “Cruz the Bible Tells Me So” (on the parallel world of Kulturkampf religious apologetics) “Troubles in Paradise” chapters at www.tortucan.wordpress.com. Comments and questions are welcome there as well.

So whatever wonderments there may be deduced about seed plant coverings, it doesn’t provide a shoehorn verification for the biblical stories in general (or any other known religious origins tradition).

As for quantum physics, I am unclear what the questioner thinks they mean by a supposed problem there in “determining how one thing happens over another.”  Quantum physics involves probability, true, but in the end the probability waves operate with a mathematical precision.  It works, and so well that the solid state physics your computer microprocessors rely on are describable with extreme reliability.

Now if any religious texts had shown the slightest indication that their inspirational sources were aware of the nature of quantum physics, or MADS-Box genes, or why so many Cretaceous Era plants looked the way they did and not quite yet like the ones we have now, that would be impressive.  But that’s not what we get.  We get jealous beings doing magical things having more in common with the Sinbad and Ichabod Crane imaginative fiction mode than what can be studied in the vast science literature.

There is indeed a lot of True Science out there, and I heartily recommend people read more of it.

Jim Downard
Jim Downard
Jim Downard is a Spokane native (with a sojourn in Southern California back in the early 1960s) who was raised in a secular family, so says had no personal faith to lose. He's always been a history and science buff (getting a bachelor's in the former area at what was then Eastern Washington University in the early 1970s).

Our Sponsors

spot_img
spot_img
spot_img

3 COMMENTS

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
3 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Scott Davidson
Scott Davidson
8 years ago

GOD, I would imagine deemed it not as important to explain the fine details of things like a fruits protective coating which does not offer salvation but rather how HE came and died for you and me Jim, both sinners in need of a SAVIOR.

Bardsbrood
Bardsbrood
8 years ago

Thank you, Jim, this was a fun read. If people said they could see God metaphorically in a plant, I find this akin to anthropomorphic forms of seeing personhood in animate and inanimate forms in folk tales from all over the world, which is a testament to the great imagination and creativity in people. I also find it fascinating that people are using what was a former mode of intelligent design theory in medieval times, when all things were classified as to how they were alike to god, rather than how they differed. Classification systems changed and this also changed a paradigm in science which led to far more break throughs in health and etc. I also find it startling when someone who only uses science as a way of making their religious arguments thinks the greatest problem within quantum physics is how one thing happens over another? This is certainly not the greatest challenge in quantum physics. 🙂 It is also predictable that there is a comment on this article which dismisses the letter of the law in the bible and supposedly embraces its spirit at the posters convenience.

Scott Davidson
Scott Davidson
8 years ago
Reply to  Bardsbrood

What is the letter of the law you are referring to?

spot_img
3
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x