The big finish!
Music by Jonathan Coulton and Maximum the Hormone ... Still a LOT of time. 4.6 BILLION years. After being a lifeless rock for six-hundred-million years, we got single celled organisms. Imagine that - it took six-hundred-million years just to get the most basic forms of life started on this li
ttle ball of dirt. And those simple, single-celled life forms ruled the Earth for THREE BILLION years. Think about THAT for a second, now - the Earth, the vastness of the entire earth, populated by nothing but single celled organisms for THREE BILLION YEARS. It took THAT long for basic multi
cellular life to emerge. That's a lot of time. During this time, of course, evolution was constantly in play, photosynthesis did not just magically occur along with the water plants - many single-celled organisms make use of photosynthesis. So after 3 billion long years, we FINALLY have simple multi
cellular plants. Then, after four-hundred million years, near the end of the Precambrian period, we got animals! Real simple animals But, it's progress. Evolution is always in action, always slowly shaping the course of life's progress. Then we had arthropods, fish, land plants, insects, amphibi
ans and reptiles, dinosaurs, mammals, birds - then, about 65 million years ago, the dinosaurs died out, and even after that, it took another 63 MILLION years for the first humans to appear. By humans of course I do not mean homo sapiens - but any members of the homo genus - beginning with our earlie
st ancestors in Africa. Eventually came homo erectus, perhaps a million years ago, they looked a lot more like modern humans than previous ancestors. Modern humans have only been around about two-hundred-fifty thousand years. That is nothing, the blink of an eye. Look how far we've come. It is lik
e the tortoise and the hare - indeed, slow and steady wins the race, and evolution has been acting, slowly and steadily, throughout the Earth's entire 4 billion years of life. It is only in comparatively recent times that we've had multicellular life. My brother once told me that he didn't like St
ar Trek because it was unrealistic. I thought this to be a funny observation and asked him in exactly what way it struck him unrealistic and why this should bother him. He told me that it seemed unlikely that the Enterprise would run into some trouble or adventure every single day. He said he would
love to see an episode where they just sat around drinking coffee. I responded by telling him that even though it was every day to us, it was not every day to the Enterprise. Of course there were days when the crew just ran drills and played Parrise's Squares, or spent time on the holodeck. But of
course, we aren't watching them on those days, because that would get boring quickly. In much the same way, I can understand evolution and the big bang seeming unrealistic to some, because of the amazing nature of the science behind them. However, we've had a LOT of time for evolution to go to wo
rk on life on Earth. When we look at everything that has happened, it seems like too much, but when we stop to reflect on the vast amounts of time it has taken for all this to occur, it suddenly seems much more likely. I used to be a very devout Christian, and when I did learn about evolution, I t
hought I could reconcile it with my religious beliefs. I thought, well, evolution was inspired by God and it was the way he chose to create life. But really, the fundamentalists at least stick to their guns - it does make more sense, if the universe was "created", that it would be a much faster, mor
e direct process. If it were indeed only 6,000 years old and radioactive dating, fossil records and geology confirmed this, it would be a powerful argument for creation. But they don't, they go against it by instead telling us that the universe, and even the Earth, is so old that is boggles the mind
. Another common argument is that the laws of nature work so wonderfully, and everything is so mathematically precise, how could this come from chaos. Well, chaos is not random, that's how. Laypeople often confuse chaos with chance. Chaos is actually very orderly in its own way. Like functions of
quantum mechanics, which appear very random to us at the subatomic level, but as the scale is increased, the perceived chance element grows smaller and smaller and reality seems more stable, until we get to modern Einsteinian large scale physics and the sturdy reliability of relativity. In exactly t
he same sense but reversed, seemingly random occurrences and events are in fact governed by many orderly functions on an extremely small scale. The mere fact that we can't always observe all of these happenings or fully comprehend their effects on our scale does not diminish them and it remains a fa
ct that chaos is actually the outward manifestation of order. That might seem like a point for religion, except that, if one stops to think about it, wouldn't life be LESS orderly if there was a God? There would be no need for laws of nature, let alone life that evolved slowly and a universe that ob
eyed such laws, if there were a creator. If there was an omniscient and omnipotent god, wouldn't he, she, or it simply create in whatever way they like? Why not have the gravitational constant change at random? Why not shake things up and make things interesting? If there is a god, and I highly doub
t it, then it must be a deist God, who started everything and set it in order, and then either died, or turned his back on his creation. It seems much more likely to me that time and the laws of nature simply kept at it until something did happen. Once we are here, it is natural to wonder how we got
here. It is perhaps just as natural to have a desire for an explanation that strokes our egos and makes us feel special, but we must come to see the light of truth - that after so much time, our being here is no longer an unlikely outcome - given enough time, it is an inevitability. Let me explai
n further. I promise, I'll stop after this. The final point I would like to raise is this: whether or not you believe in a cyclical universe model from the brane theory or otherwise, even if you believe that this is the first and perhaps only universe, you must concede that we can only measure tim
e after the birth of the universe. Before the universe was created, how does one measure time? One cannot. This means that, as unlikely as the Big Bang may seem, it was certainly inevitable, because, before it occured, there was infinite time. If there was nothing before it, then time was meaning
less, and there is no limit to how much time there is for the big bang to occur. This means, that as unlikely as you may think the big bang to be, even if you think it had only 1 trillionth of 1 trillionth of 1 trillionth of a percent - or less, be my guest - of a chance of occur, it eventually had
to occur, because before the big bang occurred, there was all the time that was ever needed FOR it to occur. Our inability or unwillingness to comprehend the fullness of time is the greatest roadblock to understanding the truth of the inevitability of the universe's creation. And once it is under
stood to be eventually inevitable, no matter how seemingly improbable, all necessity for a divine creating intelligence is removed. Thank you for your time.

See more videos uploaded by AtheistAaron