Fine tuning, a new approach

[KCfromNC]

They conclude the anthropic principle do they not?

Why are you asking me? You've been insisting you know exactly what its in the paper despite never reading it. Are you flip-flopping on that claim?

 

[KCfromNC]

But then you listed him as a scientist that agreed with fine tuning. If your list of scientists who accept fine tuning includes people who think the anthropic principle negates fine tuning, it's not much of a list, is it?

Nah, it is all part of the game. List a bunch of people who accept fine tuning - as in "if things were different then they would be different" - no matter how significant that they believe that fact to be. Then pretend that means they also use the fine tuning argument to support their belief that baby Jesus is their lord and savior. Even the atheist, Jewish and deist ones. Makes perfect sense, if you're trying to dig up reasons to justify a believing what you wish were true.

 

[KCfromNC]

How does the anthropic principle negate fine tuning?

Fine tuning, or the fine tuning argument?

 

[KCfromNC]

Actually the argument is based on what we know, what we don't know.

When what we know differs by 120 orders of magnitude depending on which opinion you get, that's approaching "we don't know" areas pretty quickly.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Nah, it is all part of the game. List a bunch of people who accept fine tuning - as in "if things were different then they would be different" - no matter how significant that they believe that fact to be. Then pretend that means they also use the fine tuning argument to support their belief that baby Jesus is their lord and savior. Even the atheist, Jewish and deist ones. Makes perfect sense, if you're trying to dig up reasons to justify a believing what you wish were true.

Again, you continue to make false accusations. I have been very very clear that the majority of scientists do not accept God as the explanation for the fine tuning. Why do you continue to claim I am making claims I'm not?

 

[Oncedeceived]

When what we know differs by 120 orders of magnitude depending on which opinion you get, that's approaching "we don't know" areas pretty quickly.

Again not true. You do know that science uses these numbers specifically and the same numbers for all scientific questions don't you?

 

[Oncedeceived]

Fine tuning, or the fine tuning argument?

Fine tuning is the physical phenomena labeled by scientists that the fundamental constants hold precise values that give our universe the life permitting values for intelligent life. What is the fine tuning argument?

 

[Oncedeceived]

Why are you asking me? You've been insisting you know exactly what its in the paper despite never reading it. Are you flip-flopping on that claim?

I am confirming.

 

[[serious]]

Fine tuning is the physical phenomena labeled by scientists that the fundamental constants hold precise values that give our universe the life permitting values for intelligent life. What is the fine tuning argument?

Getting back on topic, I can likewise argue that theologians depend on the precise characteristics of God to make all their arguments

 

[KCfromNC]

Again, you continue to make false accusations.

Just not in any way you can actually demonstrate.

 

[KCfromNC]

Again not true. You do know that science uses these numbers specifically and the same numbers for all scientific questions don't you?

Can you give some examples of scientific papers using either 10^10^123 or 10^229 as the basis of an answer to a scientific question? 5 or 10 should be sufficient to show you're not just making this stuff up.

 

[KCfromNC]

What is the fine tuning argument?

See the OP for an example.

 

[KCfromNC]

I am confirming.

If you insist.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Getting back on topic, I can likewise argue that theologians depend on the precise characteristics of God to make all their arguments

Uh, yes? That is what theism is about.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Can you give some examples of scientific papers using either 10^10^123 or 10^229 as the basis of an answer to a scientific question? 5 or 10 should be sufficient to show you're not just making this stuff up.

Do you think that an atheist scientist with high credentials would put something out there that was incorrect mathematically without his peers criticizing it if it were?

 

[KCfromNC]

Do you think that an atheist scientist with high credentials would put something out there that was incorrect mathematically without his peers criticizing it if it were?

I guess that's a no - you can't back up your claim that "science uses these numbers specifically".

 

[Oncedeceived]

I guess that's a no - you can't back up your claim that "science uses these numbers specifically".

Science uses the speed of light, gravitational constant, and planck's constant to name a few that science uses all the time.

 

[[serious]]

Uh, yes? That is what theism is about.

Right, so God is fine tuned just like the universe is.

 

[[serious]]

Science uses the speed of light, gravitational constant, and planck's constant to name a few that science uses all the time.

ok, so how finely tuned are the gravitational constant, speed of light, and the reduced planck constant?

 

[lesliedellow]

ok, so how finely tuned are the gravitational constant, speed of light, and the reduced planck constant?

Very.