Staggering Scientific Evidence Our Place in the Cosmos is Designed (ft. Jay Richards)

20 years ago, Jay Richards and Guillermo Gonzalez released a provocative book: "The Privileged Planet." They argued that Earth is not an insignificant blip on the universe’s radar. Rather, there is a staggering array of scientific evidence that our location is the cosmos is the result of design. In this video, I talk with Dr. Jay Richards about how the evidence for our privileged status has grown over the past 20 years. PLEASE write in your questions or objections and we are going LIVE this Friday, 10am, to tackle the toughest ones.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA:
TikTok: @sean_mcdowell

[thespiritofhegel]

Einstein's theory of relativity is the theory that time passes more slowly when you are with your relatives.

[judygranberg]

Seeing the vastness of the universe, the Bible tells us it shows the majesty/ greatness of God!

[margarettownley]

I would have been 16 when I went to see the original PP video at a local church, and I've never forgotten it. I don't think it's overstating to say it had a profound effect on my faith. Thank you, Jay and Guillermo.

[JungleJargon]

The existence of matter is evidence of Creation since matter can’t make itself.

[sandramj]

God is great! He is all knowing! Praise God!

[BibleSongs]

I love all the ID guys, but Jay Richards is one of the best. The confluence of design for function, discoverability, and beauty is amazing.

[chriskeen]

Best proof for an intelligent creator is that without one you can't prove anything. Information only comes from a mind. Time+Matter+Chance by random unguided processes will never get u to logic itself

[liljade]

I loved the documentary The Privileged Planet

[Jesusandmentalhealth]

My favorite line from Men In Black:

"You humans! When will you learn that size doesn't matter? Just because something's important, doesn't mean it's not very small..." ~ Frank the Pug

[corkypeavy]

I did not know about this book, but read "lucky planet" by Waltham which came much later and says similar things. To my amazement, the author seems totally oblivious to how this points towards a creator. For me his book was a powerful apologetic - apparently by accident.

[Agben]

Saw Jay speak at Denton Bible (Tx). He was great!

[joshuapizarro]

That makes sense. Most scientists are atheists. So them acquiescing would certainly be a difficult undertaking. I’m just glad it’s gaining traction because ultimately it is a very compelling argument once taken seriously.

[gardenladyjimenez]

Thanks for your book, this show, and especially to hear from viewers with their questions and your answers!

[mikelsikel]

QUESTION(s)/COMMENT: first, I do appreciate Sean and Jay’s willingness to be open to questions.

Here goes: I’m not sure the argument about eclipses enabling scientific discovery is a great one for design. One needs to have the implicit assumption that God wants humanity to discover science (and by extension: hypothesize to a designer). Let’s grant that. If so, why is it *just now* in ~2000 AD that relativity has been proved by watching stars during an eclipse? Einstein came up with relativity before the experiment - and so if there hadn’t been eclipses, then eventually relativity would have been demonstrated experimentally anyway (eg speed of light tests, time dilation on satellites, other astronomical observations, particle behaviour in accelerators, etc). So we don’t really *need* eclipses to be “just so” - just to show that scientific discovery was enabled by a Designer.

If you’re still going to persist in that claim, I could just as easily invent other examples where more scientific discovery could have been enabled hundreds or thousands of years earlier (and by extension: saving many more souls by turning them to Christianity sooner, if science points the way to God). Examples: why not enable humans with microscopic seeing eye lenses that can see cells? Why not let us “hear” or see in radio frequencies? I could go on - and yes you can say that’s silly. But *if* you say my examples are silly, then I could probably level the same charge against the somewhat ad hoc “eclipses enabled relativity” argument - if used from an apologetics point of view.

[hoodleehoo]

QUESTION: Best critique I can think up is that the "ideal" level of scientific knowability is arbitrary. Argument requires an assumption that our current knowabilty is the ideal amount. What about all the things we can't know or test? (Eg., are there other dimensions and how do they work?) Imagine a universe where life is able to know/test a lot more than we can, and how they would view a universe like ours as limited. We can’t know what we can't know.

[wkylegreen]

Really enjoyed this!!! So interesting, can’t wait to read the book.

[JamesMiddletonDesign]

The best starting point to come closer to an answer to whether or not God possibly exists is the simplest one: 'Why is there something, rather than nothing?'. This question used to annoy me. I thought it was too simplistic. However, I have changed my mind on this. I think it is a powerful thought to mull over.

[roblangsdorf]

QUESTION: Dr Russell Humphreys has determined that the earth's magnetic field has a half life that means it is decaying away.
How important is this field and what sorts of effects are likely to occur due to this decline?
What does this decay rate tells us about how old the maximum age of the earth could be?

[denniscerletti]

I'm surprised Sean hasn't had on his interviews Dr Hugh Ross. He can explain that the earth is designed to the core! He has really put it all together from the big bang to life's window here on earth made perfect for the human species. All of the universe's precise size an mass was necessary to make all of the perfect balance of all the elements. It's why he has a website titled, "Reasons to believe", he better hurry up because he is now 79 years old. He rekindled my faith, immensely.

[FirstNameLastName-rsqo]

@SeanMcDowell Douglas Axe wrote a book called "Undeniable" that broadly talks about the correlation of nature's beauty and science.