10.03.2023 Views

richard_dawkins_-_the_god_delusion

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

W H Y T II E R E A L M O S T C E R T A I N L Y I S N O G O D 113

THE ULTIMATE BOEING 747

The argument from improbability is the big one. In the traditional

guise of the argument from design, it is easily today's most popular

argument offered in favour of the existence of God and it is seen,

by an amazingly large number of theists, as completely and utterly

convincing. It is indeed a very strong and, I suspect, unanswerable

argument - but in precisely the opposite direction from the theist's

intention. The argument from improbability, properly deployed,

comes close to proving that God does not exist. My name for the

statistical demonstration that God almost certainly does not exist is

the Ultimate Boeing 747 gambit.

The name comes from Fred Hoyle's amusing image of the Boeing

747 and the scrapyard. I am not sure whether Hoyle ever wrote it

down himself, but it was attributed to him by his close colleague

Chandra Wickramasinghe and is presumably authentic. 58 Hoyle

said that the probability of life originating on Earth is no greater

than the chance that a hurricane, sweeping through a scrapyard,

would have the luck to assemble a Boeing 747. Others have

borrowed the metaphor to refer to the later evolution of complex

living bodies, where it has a spurious plausibility. The odds against

assembling a fully functioning horse, beetle or ostrich by randomly

shuffling its parts are up there in 747 territory. This, in a nutshell,

is the creationist's favourite argument - an argument that could be

made only by somebody who doesn't understand the first thing

about natural selection: somebody who thinks natural selection is a

theory of chance whereas - in the relevant sense of chance - it is the

opposite.

The creationist misappropriation of the argument from improbability

always takes the same general form, and it doesn't make

any difference if the creationist chooses to masquerade in the

politically expedient fancy dress of 'intelligent design' (ID).* Some

observed phenomenon - often a living creature or one of its more

complex organs, but it could be anything from a molecule up to the

universe itself - is correctly extolled as statistically improbable.

Sometimes the language of information theory is used: the

Darwinian is challenged to explain the source of all the information

Intelligent design has been unkindly described as creationism in a cheap tuxedo.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!