Missing the Obvious
Lone Ranger and Tonto
The Lone Ranger and Tonto are
camping in the desert, set up their tent, and are asleep. Some hours
later, The Lone Ranger wakes his faithful friend.
"Tonto, look up and tell me what you see."
Tonto replies, "Me see millions of stars."
"What does that tell you?" asks The Lone Ranger.
Tonto ponders for a minute.
"Astronomically speaking, it tells me that there are millions of
galaxies and potentially billions of planets.
Astrologically, it tells me that Saturn is in Leo.
Time wise, it appears to be approximately a quarter past three.
Theologically, it's evident the Lord is all powerful and we are small and
insignificant.
Meteorologically, it seems we will have a beautiful day tomorrow.
What it tell you, Kemo Sabi?"
The Lone Ranger is silent for a moment, then speaks.
"Tonto, you Dumb Hoss, someone has stolen our tent."
The above joke is a good lesson in missing the obvious. Chances are that you were surprised by the Lone Ranger's response. However, the first sentence of the joke tells you that the Lone Ranger and Tonto were camping in a tent. It should have been clear at Tonto's first response that he was missing the obvious.
Likewise, those who have already decided that God does not exist and that all processes must have a naturalistic explanation, do not see the obvious evidence that the universe was designed, rather than happened by chance. As discussed on another page, rational explanations for the creation of the universe come down to two main possibilities:
- Design by an intelligent being
- Happened by random chance
What are the differences between the two creators?
| Characteristic | God | Super Universe |
| Transcendence | Yes | Yes |
| Eternal | Yes | Yes |
| Creation of Universe | Designed | Random |
| Intelligence | High | Stupid |
What we see in the table is a comparison of the two possible types of creators. Both creators must possess certain characteristics in common, such as being eternal and being transcendent to this universe. However, the naturalistic creator must be "stupid" and must have created our exquisitely-designed universe through some sort of random process. For some reason, the atheist chooses to believe that the universe arose randomly by the action of a stupid creator, instead of seeing the obvious - that a well-designed universe would most likely come into being through the actions of an intelligent designer. Let me give you an example. I show you a computer and ask you to make your best choice as to how it came into being:
- Designed and put together by intelligent human beings.
- Random computer parts were put into a large box and the parts soldered randomly by spraying molten lead into the box as it was rotated. This process was continued many times until the computer happened to be produced.
Well, its your choice. Have you checked your tent lately?
Today's New Reason to Believe
Integrating Science and Faith
- 11/05/2012 12:52 AM
Imperial College Debate on Evidence for God
In spring of 2012, my colleague Kenneth Samples and I spent several days in London, England, speaking in universities, churches, leadership gatherings, and at a conference. God gave us a wonderful opportunity to take RTB’s message of science-faith compatibility overseas. Here I recap my interactions with distinguished professor Lewis Wolpert. **** On May 24, 2012, … Read more
() - 11/01/2012 12:30 AM
Resource Highlight: Creation Day Debates
Earlier this week, guest writer Otis Graf explained how the ejection dynamics of meteoroids from the star Beta Pictoris and the meteoroids’ detection on Earth cannot be reconciled with a young universe—thus challenging young-earth proponent Dr. Jason Lisle’s model for solving the distant starlight problem. RTB’s Hugh Ross and Fazale Rana have debated Dr. Lisle … Read more
() - 10/29/2012 12:44 AM
Alien Particles Challenge a Young-Earth Creation Model
A collimated beam of meteoroids from the star Beta Pictoris has been discovered. However, the ejection dynamics at the star and the meteoroids’ detection on Earth cannot be reconciled with a young universe. This discovery directly challenges two tenets of young-earth proponent Dr. Jason Lisle’s model for solving the distant starlight problem. **** The 1950s … Read more
() - 10/25/2012 12:05 PM
TNRTB Classic: Basking in UV Radiation
On Monday, guest writer and visiting scholar Hugh Henry discussed research into the effects of radiation on the human body. Despite our fear of radiation, it seems that God has designed the human physiology to withstand a reasonable about of exposure. Check out this previous TNRTB from Fazale Rana on how our DNA reacts to … Read more
() - 10/25/2012 12:34 AM
TNRTB Classic: Basking in UV Radiation
On Monday, guest writer and visiting scholar Hugh Henry discussed research into the effects of radiation on the human body. Despite our fear of radiation, it seems that God has designed the human physiology to withstand a reasonable about of exposure. Check out this previous TNRTB from Fazale Rana on how our DNA reacts to … Read more
() - 10/22/2012 12:50 PM
“Deadly” Radiation and God’s Design
A feature article in the August 2012 issue of Scientific American trumpets a scary warning: “Deadly Rays from Clouds—Thunderstorms Give Out Powerful Blasts of X-Rays and Gamma Rays.”1 Headlines are written to grab the reader’s attention—whether or not the article’s content lives up to the hype. At the end of this particular article, the authors … Read more
() - 10/18/2012 12:26 AM
TNRTB Classic: Increased Oxygen
Earth experienced many events that brought it to the brink of becoming a barren wasteland. Two dramatic increases in the atmospheric oxygen content (2.5 and 0.8 billion years ago, respectively) resulted in mile-thick ice sheets that nearly encased the planet. Yet Earth rebounded from all these events, better prepared for the new life that arrived … Read more
() - 10/15/2012 12:17 AM
First Plants Bring Major Climate Change
RTB’s creation model posits that the change in life throughout Earth’s history reflects the work of a divine intelligence transforming a hostile-to-life planet into one capable of supporting humanity. As the environs change, so must the life. Studies of the first plant life on the continents show how the plants altered the land and atmosphere … Read more
() - 10/11/2012 12:36 AM
TNRTB Classic: Junk DNA and the Nucleoskeletal Hypothesis
A few days ago I wrote about the ENCODE project and the new recognition that, at minimum, 80 percent of the human genome consists of functional DNA elements. Despite some skeptics’ complaints that the media, creationists, and intelligent design adherents have misconstrued the ENCODE report, the project’s results stand. The human genome is not a vast … Read more
() - 10/08/2012 12:26 AM
Responding to ENCODE “Skeptics”
Recently, the ENCODE Project Consortium reported that 80 percent of the human genome consists of functional elements, major indicators of design. But some skeptics assert (loudly) that the results of the ENCODE project have been overhyped and misconstrued. In this article, I respond to the most salient points made by the ENCODE “skeptics.” The human … Read more
()
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/obvious.html
Last Modified March 10, 2005
Top of Page 
Back