Evidence for God in Physical Design Archives

August 3, 2026August 2, 2026

The Pale Blue Dot

The picture above is the “Pale Blue Dot” photograph, taken by the Voyager 1 spacecraft on Valentine’s Day, February 14, 1990. At the time, Voyager 1 was 3.8 billion miles (6 billion km) from Earth and moving away. The camera was about to be shut down to save power, since it was not going to fly close to any planet as it was leaving the solar system. Before shutdown, the mission commander ordered the probe to take 60 images to form a “Family Portrait of the Solar System.” Thirty-four minutes after it took this picture, the camera was shut down forever. In the picture, the Sun is below, and the pale blue dot you can barely see in a sunbeam is planet Earth.

This year, prominent atheists became upset by astronaut Victor Glover’s words aboard Artemis 2 during its historic trip around the Moon. Some even expressed concern about the “separation of church and space.” However, when he spoke from space, he seemed to receive approval from the other astronauts, but not from atheists on the ground. Some of Glover’s words that apparently upset atheists include, “You’re on a spaceship called Earth that was created to give us a place to live in the universe. You are special. In all of this emptiness, this is a whole bunch of nothing, this thing we call the universe, you have this oasis, this beautiful place that we get to exist together.” The pale blue dot is not insignificant.

Why should those words distress anyone? Many early scientists explored creation because they believed in an orderly universe created by an intelligent God. Many astronauts have said that being in space gave them a spiritual experience as they realized that Earth reveals design and purpose. Many leading science popularizers have tried to tell us that science destroys Christian belief. Richard Dawkins, Bill Nye, Michael Shermer, Lawrence Krauss, and others have written popular books arguing that science makes belief in God unnecessary and implausible. The truth is that scientific discoveries continue to support belief in God and challenge atheism.

Astronomer Carl Sagan was partially responsible for the picture of the pale blue dot, and he popularized the term in his book by the same name. He wrote, “Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all its vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves.” He also said that Earth is such a tiny pale blue dot in the universe that it shows we have no privileged position in the cosmos. Sagan was a brilliant man, but he overlooked the fact that Someone did come from elsewhere to save us. Victor Glover knows that is true. He said that we are not a lonely cosmic accident, but instead, we are loved, and those who believe in Jesus Christ agree.

July 14, 2026July 13, 2026

What Is a Star-Filled Sky Worth?

What is a star-filled sky worth? When David wrote his psalms, he sat under a star-filled sky without the problem of light pollution from city lights, satellites, or reflective mirrors in the sky. What would it be like if there were tens of thousands of mirrors in low Earth orbit reflecting sunlight down onto various dark areas of the planet?

A California company called Reflect Orbital (we reported on it earlier) hopes to put at least 50,000 mirrors in orbit by 2035 to reflect sunlight onto various customers on Earth’s surface. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has just given them permission to test the idea by launching their first space mirror into orbit.

Ben Nowak, the CEO of Reflect Orbital, suggests endless possibilities with sunlight not limited by geography or time of day. His company’s website says it could help search-and-rescue teams locate a missing person much more quickly. Another suggestion is that a city could have evenly lit streets without carbon emissions from electric-powered streetlights. Furthermore, construction projects could be completed in half the time because the crews could work safely through the night. And, of course, they also suggest mirrors reflecting sunlight onto solar arrays could extend their electricity-generating ability and reduce the use of fossil fuels.

The question is, what is a star-filled sky worth? Many people visit dark-sky locations to enjoy the stars and the Milky Way at night. The Colorado Plateau in the southwestern United States spans Colorado, Arizona, Utah, and New Mexico and is home to many of the best dark-sky locations. Places like Grand Canyon National Park, Zion National Park, Great Basin National Park, Arches National Park, Bryce Canyon National Park, Canyonlands National Park, and Natural Bridges National Monument are locations where visitors see the night sky without major light pollution.

So far, the emphasis has been on the economic advantages that could be derived from placing mirrors in space to direct sunlight into various locations. But a team of researchers is attempting to put an economic price on the cost of the loss of dark skies and the impact on tourism. They’re concerned about the “decline in visitor satisfaction when environmental quality deteriorates.” Another factor that must be considered is the effect on wildlife in areas where those mirrors are beamed and the circadian rhythm of animals, plants, and people from the diffused light that is scattered out into a larger area. God has given us a beautiful night sky that the psalmist was able to enjoy thousands of years ago. It is already disappearing. Will that be completely lost to coming generations? What is a star-filled sky worth?

References: space.com HERE and HERE

July 10, 2026July 9, 2026

Why a Seven-Day Week?

An interesting question young people ask is why there are seven days in a week and why we have a weekend. The Bible gave humans a seven-day week, and that framework works very well. Genesis 2:2 tells us that on the seventh day God rested from the creation of the cosmos, and Exodus 20:11 repeats that assertion.

Skeptics have said this was copied from the Babylonians, since ancient Babylonian astronomers could see seven astronomical bodies – Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn. But the Babylonians had a five-day week, and Babylonian contracts from Mari (Tell el-Hariri) show there was no day of rest or Sabbath, as work was carried on continuously. Other cultures had systems based on different numbers of days, such as the Egyptian ten-day week and the Roman eight-day week.

Attempts to replace the seven-day week with an astronomical system have failed. A day is the time for one rotation of the Earth on its axis, and a year is the time it takes for the Earth to make one revolution around the Sun. The problem is that it takes 365 and ¼ days to make one revolution, so we have to add an extra day in February every four years (for a leap year).

The seven-day week is a creation of God. It is seen in every part of human activity, including mental health and bodily functions. Every other system humans have tried has been unsuccessful. God created man in a way that allows us to live longer than any other mammal. The weekend reminds us of our unique existence, and the Sabbath in ancient times and the Lord’s Day in the Christian era reinforce our faith if we will allow them to.

References: USA Today and Wikipedia.

July 2, 2026June 28, 2026

Extraterrestrial Life Has Visited Earth

There continues to be a lot of talk and concern about intelligent alien life invading planet Earth. This shows up in news reports about the federal government releasing UFO (UAP) files and in recent movies. Is it possible that extraterrestrial life has visited Earth or is presently visiting Earth?

There is no evidence of intelligent alien life anywhere in our solar system. That means any extraterrestrial visitors would have to come from another star system elsewhere in our Milky Way. We don’t have any evidence, either through SETI or by any of our space telescopes, to indicate that intelligent life could be living on a planet or possibly a moon anywhere closer than many light-years from Earth. The closest star to our Sun is Proxima Centauri, which is 4.25 light-years away. So, any intelligent aliens would have to travel for many years, or possibly centuries, to get here. That assumes they could travel at 10% of the speed of light. Light speed is 186,000 miles (300,000,000 meters) per second. Einstein’s equations, which have been verified, indicate that it is not possible to travel anywhere near the speed of light. In fact, most studies suggest that 10% of the speed of light (19,000 miles per second) is the highest realistic speed for traveling through space.

The reason for the speed limitation involves the laws of physics, engineering constraints, and the amount of fuel required to propel a spacecraft. Because space has no air, traveling through it causes less resistance than traveling through our atmosphere. Once the spacecraft achieves its cruising speed, the propulsion system could be shut down. However, it would have to be used again many years later for deceleration at the end of the journey.

Even though there’s no air in space, there are hydrogen atoms and microscopic-sized grains of dust. Traveling at 19,000 miles per second, those dust particles would hit a spacecraft’s hull like speeding bullets, possibly piercing the hull unless it was sufficiently thick. Even striking hydrogen atoms would produce radiation that could erode the hull. Therefore, the hull would have to be thicker, increasing the mass and requiring more fuel. More fuel adds more weight, so you must add more fuel to compensate for the weight of that extra fuel. It’s a vicious cycle.

All of our rockets that propel payloads into space have used chemical reactions for propulsion. The mass of fuel needed for a spacecraft to reach a velocity of 19,000 miles per second would require more chemical fuel than the mass of the entire observable universe. Therefore, chemical propulsion is not feasible. Nuclear fusion is something that NASA has been working on, and it would be a more efficient way to generate propulsion, but getting a spaceship to cruise at 19,000 miles per second would require nuclear fuel equivalent to 150 times the spaceship’s mass. Therefore, that doesn’t seem like a good alternative. Another possibility would be antimatter propulsion, which exists only in theory. So far, scientists have created only 20 billionths of a gram of antimatter, and it lasts only a fraction of a second. Plus, the cost of producing it runs into hundreds of millions of dollars.

If extraterrestrial life has visited Earth, we would expect it to face many physical problems. Beyond that, there is the time required. If they were coming from a star system 50 light-years away and traveling at 10 percent of the speed of light, it would take them 500 years to get here. Unless these intelligent space aliens have extremely long lifespans, it would have to be a multi-generational trip. They would have to be much better than human earthlings at getting along with each other in confined spaces. They would also need a strong desire to visit our planet. If they were that interested in us, they could send electromagnetic radio waves, which travel at the speed of light.

The intelligence, technology, and physical resources required for extraterrestrials to travel to Earth are enormous. In addition, if they came from a civilization so advanced that they could solve all of these problems, why would they waste all those resources to visit the relatively primitive planet Earth?

Considering the facts, the probability that extraterrestrial life has visited Earth seems extremely slim. However, there is very strong evidence that extraterrestrial life has visited Earth. This planet has been visited by its Creator, and He looked like one of us. We have dealt with the evidence of that visitation many times before, and you can read the story of it in the first 14 verses of the Gospel of John in your Bible.

Reference: theconversation.com

June 22, 2026June 21, 2026

Fine-Tuning Explanation

Roberto Fumagalli is a Senior Lecturer in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at King’s College London. Some months ago, he wrote an article in the Journal for General Philosophy of Science arguing that the fine-tuning of the laws and constants of our universe that makes life possible is real and requires a non-chance-based explanation. In other words, chance is not an adequate fine-tuning explanation for the existence of life. We have argued before that the universe is fine-tuned for intelligent life.

Fumagalli summarizes his argument as follows:

1- The universe is fine-tuned for intelligent life.

2- The probability of fine-tuning is not consistent with chance.

3- Therefore, fine-tuning calls for a non-chance-based explanation.

Scientists widely acknowledge that there is at least some fine-tuning of the parameters and laws of the universe and that it is not trivial. However, some critics seek to cast doubt on the need for fine-tuning, saying that we don’t know what other forms of advanced life might be possible. In other words, we only know of carbon-based life, but some suggest there may be other forms in which intelligent life could flourish. However, only very specific combinations of parameter values would permit the chemical complexity required for intelligent life. Therefore, the fine-tuning explanation does not support the possibility that chance is the cause.

The values of at least some of the fundamental parameters of the universe are very unlikely to fall within the range that permits intelligent life. Only an exceedingly narrow range of parameter values would allow life, especially advanced intelligent life. So, what are the possible fine-tuning explanations for the laws of physics and the relationships between the various forces?

One explanation is chance, but that does not seem very plausible. Another explanation is the multiple-universe theory proposed by some scientists. That would require a multitude of universes with different parameters, and we just happen to be the lucky ones in the one universe that allows life to exist. That is not a scientifically testable hypothesis, and it would require a fine-tuned, multi-universe-generating device. Another possibility is some unknown physics that scientists have not yet discovered, but that would also have to be fine-tuned.

The one fine-tuning explanation that seems by far the most acceptable, the most supportive of the evidence, is that our universe is the product of cosmic design by an infinite intelligence, namely the God of the Bible.

Reference: scienceandculture.com

May 18, 2026May 16, 2026

Africa’s Massive Size

How big is Africa? With Africa’s massive size, you could overlay the United States, China, India, Eastern Europe, Italy, Switzerland, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, and Japan on top of Africa with no overlap among the countries.

Many misunderstandings stem from the way maps are drawn. Mercator maps, which we are familiar with, show the United States as a very large landmass, and we know it has many natural resources. How blessed Africa is in terms of natural resources remains unknown because of Africa’s huge size and human exploitation. Wars have been fought over much smaller areas of land.

The implications of Africa’s massive size are enormous, with the greatest being an abundance of natural resources along with an abundance of people who need to hear the Gospel. Nearly every element necessary for technology can be found in Africa. However, the exploitation of the people in Africa has prevented the extraction of most of these resources, and many are still unexplored. Human greed has prevented us from using the abundant resources God has provided, but the problem all begins with the exploitation of other humans.

Reference: Skeptical Inquirer, volume 50 #3, pages 52-59

May 14, 2026May 13, 2026

Space Aliens and Disclosure Day

There has been an explosion of comments in the news media and on social media about space aliens and Disclosure Day, following President Trump’s order to release previously classified information on UAPs (UFOs). At the same time, a “blockbuster” movie by Steven Spielberg is set to be released on June 12, 2026. Its title is Disclosure Day, based on a story by Spielberg, a firm believer in extraterrestrials.

Social media contains comments that the government’s disclosure of information about UAPs will challenge traditional religious beliefs. The current print issue of Moviemaker magazine features an interview with David Koepp, the screenwriter of the Disclosure Day movie. When the interviewer asked him if he believed in aliens, he compared aliens to God or religion. He said, “My personal belief is the same as my personal belief in God, which is why I think religion is an important part of Disclosure Day.” He goes on to say that his favorite theory about aliens is, “Yes, other intelligent life forms exist. Yes, they’ve been here. They may even be here now. We can’t perceive them.”

Thus far, what the government has released from its secret files is not much more than grainy pictures of objects in the sky that seem to move erratically, filmed from a distance. There doesn’t seem to be anything different from what we have seen before. Concerning space aliens and Disclosure Day, Spielberg claims that the movie will contain “more truth than fiction” and will “upend all established order.” That sounds to me like overblown promotional hoopla designed to sell more tickets.

What if the government released materials that conclusively demonstrated that aliens are visiting our planet? Would it mean the end of Christian faith? Would it refute the Bible? The answer is no and no. The Bible deals with the creation of the universe (Genesis 1:1) and the creation of life upon the Earth (the rest of Genesis 1 and 2). It also tells us that God created spiritual beings. It does not tell us whether God created physical creatures elsewhere within the universe. Even if God created life on other planets within the universe, which is questionable, and even if we learned that aliens have visited Earth, that would not refute the existence of God. Those other creatures would have to have been created by God. Only an intelligent force outside of the universe could have created what is within the universe.

Fred Hoyle and other scientists have advanced the idea of “panspermia,” meaning that life on Earth was seeded by aliens from elsewhere in the universe. There is absolutely no evidence for that, but even if true, it would not explain where those intelligent beings came from. It has been scientifically established that the universe had a beginning. That was the beginning of time, space, matter, and energy, so whatever caused the universe’s origin was outside of time and space and not material. That is the way the Bible describes God. Don’t let space aliens and Disclosure Day interfere with your faith in the one who created all things. (See Colossians 1:15-16.)

Reference: moviemaker.com

April 30, 2026April 29, 2026

A Natural Tendency to See Design and Purpose

Yesterday, we looked at a study showing that people worldwide, across various cultures, have a natural tendency to believe in God and an afterlife. Today, I want to look at a Boston University study showing that both adults and children have a natural tendency to see design and purpose in nature.

The project tested scientists at research universities such as Harvard, Yale, and MIT. It also included two control groups. One group included people with bachelor’s degrees who were about the same age as the scientists. A second control group included undergraduates. The goal was to see whether the scientists had been sufficiently trained not to see purpose or design in the natural world.

The groups were given a list of 100 statements about why things happen and asked to agree or disagree. Some of the statements showed intelligent purpose, such as “Children wear mittens in the winter to keep their hands warm.” Mixed in with those statements were others that indicated purpose in natural things, such as “The Earth has an ozone layer to protect it from UV light.” Of course, the scientists were not expected to see purpose or design in nature, so they were expected to disagree with the purpose statements concerning natural events or objects.

The research showed that the trained veteran scientists were less likely than the control groups to find purposeful reasons for natural events or objects. They had been trained not to see purpose or design in nature, while they could see purpose in human choices or actions. However, when the scientists were put under severe time constraints, not giving them time to carefully consider their answers, they often said that natural relationships had a purpose.

The scientists’ answers under time pressure showed that they had maintained a natural tendency to see design and purpose in nature. In other words, they had to take a moment to suppress that tendency because a purpose or design in natural things would indicate the existence of a purposeful Designer. That concept is not acceptable in modern science.

This research shows that even trained scientists have a natural tendency to see design and purpose in natural events and objects. Evolutionary biologist and atheist Richard Dawkins, writing in his book Climbing Mount Improbable, told about a time when he was driving through the countryside with his six-year-old daughter. The girl was excited about seeing “pretty” wildflowers. Dawkins asked his daughter what she thought was the purpose of wildflowers. She replied, “To make the world pretty, and to help the bees make honey for us.” Dawkins said he was sorry that he “had to tell her that it wasn’t true.” According to Dawkins, biology is the study of things that appear to be designed for a purpose, but his atheism forces him to argue that there is no purpose.

Thinking there is no purpose in nature leads to the idea that there is no purpose in our existence. Many young people who see no purpose in their lives waste their lives seeking pleasure or end their lives. Seeing no God, no design, and no purpose leads to no hope.

Reference: “The Natural Design Default” by Art Lahnke in Bostonia, winter-spring 2013

April 23, 2026April 22, 2026

Two Views of the Universe

Prominent atheists recently became upset by Victor Glover’s words aboard Artemis 2 during its history-making trip around the Moon. Some even expressed concern about the “separation of church and space.” We have written before about Victor Glover and his status as a Bible-believing Christian. When he spoke from space, he seemed to receive approval from the other astronauts, but not from atheists on the ground. We see the contrast between the two views of the universe.

Some of Glover’s words that apparently upset atheists include, “You’re on a spaceship called Earth that was created to give us a place to live in the universe…You are special. In all of this emptiness, this is a whole bunch of nothing, this thing we call the universe, you have this oasis, this beautiful place that we get to exist together…” Why should those words distress anyone?

Historically, many early scientists explored creation because they believed in an orderly universe created by an intelligent God. Many astronauts have said that being in space gave them a spiritual experience as they realized that Earth reveals design and purpose. I remember watching the Apollo 8 crew read from the book of Genesis on Christmas Day in 1968 as they traveled around the Moon. Our present NASA administrator, Jared Isaacman, said that his time in space convinced him that “the heavens declare the glory of God.”

Many leading science popularizers have tried to tell us that science destroys Christian belief. Richard Dawkins, Bill Nye, Michael Shermer, Lawrence Krauss, and others have written popular books arguing that science makes belief in God unnecessary and implausible. The two views of the universe can’t both be correct. The truth is that scientific discoveries continue to support belief in God and challenge the atheist concept.

Years ago, Carl Sagan said that Earth is such a tiny dot in the universe that it shows we have no privileged position in the cosmos. Victor Glover said that we are not a lonely cosmic accident, but instead, we are loved. On April 30, 2026, the movie “The Story of Everything” will open in select theaters nationwide. It will compare the two views of the universe—the atheist view and the biblical view that God designed and created all things and that He loves us. I think the movie will show that God’s story is the best and that it is actually supported by science.

References: scienceandculture.com HERE and HERE. You can see Victor Glover’s statement from space HERE. Click H ERE for more information about “The Story of Everything.”

April 22, 2026April 21, 2026

The Strongest Evidence for an Intelligent Creator

What is the strongest evidence for an intelligent Creator? That is an interesting question. Sarah Salviander, an astrophysicist, suggests that biology offers more convincing evidence than her field of astrophysics. She said, “The incredible machinery of a living cell is far more complex than the structure of an entire Galaxy of stars.” On the other hand, the late atheist critic Christopher Hitchens once said that atheists find the “fine-tuning” of the universe to be “one of the most intriguing” arguments for intelligent design. I think that biology and cosmology together make a strong case for God’s existence.

We have discussed the evidence for a Creator based on the fine-tuning of the universe. Many scientists believe the fine-tuning argument is very strong, as it seems to be the primary basis for postulating multiple universes. We must acknowledge that the evidence shows this universe has been fine-tuned from the very beginning to make it possible for life, including human life, to exist and prosper. Is that fine-tuning the strongest evidence for an intelligent Creator? Since scientists have not been able to explain it, unbelievers advance the unproven and unprovable idea that there are countless universes, and we just happen to live in the one that’s fine-tuned for life.

However, when we look at the evidence for design in living things, especially in the human body, we are in awe. As Dr. Salviander said, the incredible machinery of a living cell is far more complex than an entire Galaxy of stars. Another advantage that biology has over cosmology as the strongest evidence for an intelligent Creator is that we can see it in real time. To see the evidence for design in the fine-tuning of the universe, we must look back in time, but evidence for design in life is all around us right now. The information in DNA shows that life could not have happened by chance, since information comes only from an intelligent source.

In addition, we see beauty in living things and in the physical creation. Chance would create chaos rather than beauty. The psalmist David, who did not know about the fine-tuning of the universe, was in awe of the majesty and beauty in the night sky. (See Psalms 8 and 19:1-6.) The psalmist was also in awe of his own physical body, realizing that God had created him in his mother’s womb. He was awestruck by that, despite having no idea about DNA or the amazing structures within the cells of our bodies. (See Psalms 139:14-16.) Interestingly, Charles Darwin thought that cells were nothing but globs of protoplasm, and he had no idea of the remarkable machines working within every cell or of the DNA that gives instructions for the assembly of proteins to do those jobs.

The bottom line is that, regardless of what you think is the strongest evidence for an intelligent Creator, there is massive and growing evidence that we can’t ignore.

P.S. A new movie, “The Story of Everything,” is coming to select theaters around the country on April 30, 2026. In it, many experts examine two possible stories. Does the universe and life lack purpose and design, or do they show the purpose and intelligence of a divine Creator? I encourage our readers to see this film if it comes to your local theater. Does the fine-tuned cosmos or design and purpose in life provide the strongest evidence for an intelligent Creator? I encourage you to examine the evidence and decide for yourself.