Expert: Austin Cline - 4/24/2006

Question
""Throughout the cosmos there are 25 quintillion stars, each converting hydrogen into helium, thereby reducing the total amount of hydrogen in the cosmos. Just think about it! If everywhere in the cosmos hydrogen is being consumed and if the process has been going on forever, how much hydrogen should be left?"

Yes, there is a lot of hydrogen in the universe to convert. So what? How can that be "convincing" as an "argument" that some sort of god exists?"

The point he was making is that there is a limited amount of hydrogen to convert, and that if time was infinite, it would all have been converted. He then states that if there was a beginning of time, that it was caused, and if it was caused, there must be a causer. This is a huge jump i know, and i would like to offer another explanation for him, but i simply do not know enough on the subject to offer something of value.  

Answer
"The point he was making is that there is a limited amount of hydrogen to convert, and that if time was infinite, it would all have been converted. He then states that if there was a beginning of time, that it was caused, and if it was caused, there must be a causer."

1. Time is not infinite going back, but this doesn't mean that it has a "beginning." As an analogy: the earth is not infinite in space, but that doesn't allow us to conclude that there is something "to the north of the earth." The statement "to the north of the earth" is incoherent because the concept "to the north of" requires a geographical context which the Earth is not a part of; instead, it is part of the earth. Similarly, time is not infinite going backwards, but that doesn't allow us to use the incoherent statements "before time" or "beginning of time."

2. Ignoring that whole problem, it's merely a "huge jump" to go from "it had a beginning" to "it was caused." It's a completely unjustified and baseless jump. There is no warrant for it - it is, as I noted before, an assertion rather than an argument.