An open letter to Jeff Tallon:

After reading this article in the NZ Herald I felt compelled to write to Jeff and ask a few questions, so here it is:


Hello Mr Tallon

Being a fellow scientist and having just read your article on the NZ Herald I felt compelled to write to you.
As you are well aware science is the pursuit of truth and the study of evidence, but I'm having a little trouble understanding how you came to the conclusions you did.

You suggested that the Atheist bus campaign was inconsistent with what we know about our fine-tuned physical and biological world.
In what way exactly? Science is able to explain most of the aspects of our physical and biological world without ever resorting to the supernatural.
Do you perhaps have some greater understanding that the rest of the scientific community is unaware of, if so you should publish this immediate and put it up for peer review.

Secondly you state that there is "just the faintest possibility that we are here by chance". How did you come to this conclusion?
Recent evidence has shown that abiogenesis is certainly possible, and again, it doesn't resort to supernatural, unscientific explanations.
Even if we agree that the odds are slim, how were you able to dismiss them entirely in favor of a creator? And how can you say the conclusion is "clear"?

I noticed you quoted the bible, is that a reputable scientific source that I was not aware of?
You also quoted statistics saying believers were happier and healthier without giving sources.
You then misquoted Habermas.
This is all very disappointing coming from a man of science such as your self.

You state that the primary claim that "there's probably no God" is demonstrably incorrect in the light of what we know about the world.
How has it been demonstrated to be incorrect? In light of the fact that there is no evidence for any gods, doesn't it stand to reason that the only logical conclusion that can be drawn is that there really is "Probably no god".

You also state that perhaps the advert campaign could now be withdrawn on the basis of new evidence? Which evidence are you referring to?
Again, if you have any information that the world scientific community is not privy to then I highly suggest you submit it for peer review straight away. Man has been searching for evidence of gods centuries and it would be selfish to keep it locked up any longer.

And lastly I wonder, are you aware of the quote by George Bernard Shaw:
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one."

Thanks for your time and I look forward to hearing your reply, or reading about your startling discoveries for the evidence for the existence of god if every single scientific journal in the world.