Hugh Ross agrees
with Leibniz.
All's for the best in the best of all
possible worlds, and you are living
in it. As founder and president of
an old-earth creationist ministry,
Reasons to Believe, Ross also
thinks nature and the Bible are
complementary sources of truth.
Both are necessary for a complete
picture of our cosmic purpose. In
his catechetical book Why the
Universe Is the Way It Is, nature
speaks first in the form of a cosmological
fine-tuning argument from design. Fundamental properties
of the universe and unique features
of planet earth are improbably
arranged, hence designed solely
for our benefit. The remainder of
the book cites Bible chapter and
verse to dispatch the pesky problem
of evil with an eschatological
solution. Do you sometimes have
difficulty seeing the Designer's
purpose in a life-destroying tsunami, earthquake, or pandemic? All
will become clear when the "best
possible world" of this age gives
way to an even better "perfect"
world of the next. But purpose is
still discernible in events of this
world, including the greatest of
tragedies. You must simply look
harder. Ross explains that the quest
for meaning is like playing
"Where's Waldo?" in the children's
book series of the same name. Why
is the universe so big, old, dark,
lonely, and in decline (chapters
2–6)? Ross finds the Waldoes and
points them out. Like Christopher
Durang's Sister Mary Ignatius, he
"explains it all for you".
Ross's version of the cosmic
fine-tuning argument resembles
that of several Discovery Institute
Fellows, although he parts company
with their efforts to promote a
non-supernatural designer in public
science education. Physicists
have understood for quite some
time that life as we know it could
not exist if any of several cosmic
constants deviated from their
observed values by one part in 1040
or some similarly large number
(for example, see Rees 2001). Why
is this true? The anthropic principle
points out that, were it otherwise,
we would not be here to ask
the question. But is our existence
due to a colossal fluke, some yet-undiscovered
natural law(s), divine
design, or a rarity made inevitable
by membership in a super-huge,
random, and mostly sterile set of
multiple universes (the "multiverse")?
For Ross, design is the
only option worth talking about. To
make his case, he recites
from an expanding litany of
gee-whiz antecedents to existence
(chapter 8) and ignores competing
explanations.
In the standard design solution
to fine-tuning, a Designer is used to
explain the narrow range of cosmic
parameters that allow us to be
here. To use an analogy that Ross
does not, material facts of our existence
are like cards in a highly
improbable hand drawn from a
very large deck. Their putative
unlikelihood is explained if an
Intelligent Dealer picked them out
on purpose. There are 2 598 960
possible five-card hands that can
be drawn from a deck of only 52
cards. The chances of drawing any
one in particular are thus already
pretty low. But we are not likely, a posteriori, to see a miracle in
every hand drawn. What is the
prior expectation for a special
hand, then, like one that contains
two pairs? Since there are 123 552
different ways to get two pairs in a
five-card hand, the probability is
123 552/2 598 960 — about 5%. It
is somewhat unlikely to get this
result in a single deal. If you were
dealt 20 hands in succession, however,
you would not find it remarkable
to get two pairs in at least one
of them. Is the special "hand" of
our existence vastly more improbable?
Ross says yes, but he is still
answering after the fact. He does
not know the number of ways
intelligent life could be arrived at
or the number of attempts that
have occurred, or even the initial
range of possibilities (the "deck").
Despite repeated claims, he has no
way to determine if our existence
is likely or not.
Fundamental properties of the
universe are necessary but insufficient
conditions for life in it. So
Ross's Designer works post-Big
Bang to make a habitable planet
and put life on it as per Genesis 1.
That was the week that was, says
Ross, but it actually lasted several
billion years. Incredulous readers
are referred to Ross's other books
to connect Genesis to the fossil
record. Meanwhile, he expands the
fine-tuning argument along the
lines of Discovery Institute Fellows
Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay
Richards. Gonzalez is an "intelligent
design" martyr recently beatified
in Ben Stein's movie Expelled (see RNCSE 2008 Sep–Dec; 28
[5–6]). He and Ross published on
this topic as early as 2000 in the
religious journal First Things (Gonzalez and Ross 2000). At that
time, Gonzalez also collaborated
with paleontologist Peter Ward and
planetary scientist Don Brownlee who argued in Rare Earth (2000)
that our galaxy is probably not host to much extraterrestrial intelligence
(ETI). This boldly marketed conjecture was captured in a
groan-inducing parody worthy of a Yoko Ono lawsuit: "Imagine There's
No Spacemen" (sic) (http://www.astro.washington.edu/rareearth/rareearthsite/rareearth.mp3 [Link has expired]).
Ward and Brownlee contended
that to support complex intelligent
life, a planet needs an improbable
combination of things like a large
moon, plate tectonics, a nearby
Jovian planet, and location in a
"Galactic Habitable Zone" (GHZ).
Gonzalez and Richards went further
in The Privileged Planet
(2004; reviewed in RNCSE 2005
Jan–Apr; 25 [1–2]: 47–9) and saw
God where the former merely
doubted ETI. Earth is not only rare;
it's a miracle! To make the case,
they hyped the importance and
rarity of each and every condition
necessary for life as we know it.
Ross follows suit and, for instance,
champions a highly restrictive
GHZ that is simply not borne out
by quantitative modeling. On the
basis of numerical simulations that
neither Ward, Brownlee, Gonzalez,
nor Ross bothered to make,
Prantzos (2008) reports that it is
currently impossible "to draw any
significant conclusions about the
extent of the GHZ: it may well be
that the entire Milky Way disk is
suitable for complex life."
Exaggerated claims like an
extremely limited GHZ surround a
more serious central blunder in
the rare earth argument from
design: discounting the multi-planet solution. Design proponents
often cite a testability criterion
to reject undetected multiple
universes in favor of a cosmological
Designer who, coincidentally, is
also unobserved. In the terrestrial
version, however, Ross expressly ignores the ongoing discovery of a
large population of planets. By
Ross's own calculations, there are
of order 1021 stellar systems in the
observable universe alone. Current
observations and theory suggest
that nearly all these will contain
planets of some kind. But neither
Ross nor Gonzalez demonstrates,
quantitatively, that a generic planet
has less than 1 chance in 1021 of
ending up with properties that
could support complex life. There
is therefore no reason to exclude
the origin of a habitable "rare
earth" solely from natural causes,
given the size of the universe and
ubiquity of planets.
This is just one more Waldo that
vanishes under scrutiny like the
face on Mars at high resolution.
Sadly for Waldo searchers, it happens
time and time again in Ross's latest book. In the end, one finds
many reasons to doubt but few reasons
to believe.