DogmaHunter
Code Monkey
- Jan 26, 2014
- 16,757
- 8,531
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Make up your mind.Seriously? If they couldn't be different they would still be fine tuned.
No, now see you are going to the conclusion rather than the evidence. Stephen Hawking does believe the fine tuning is real and is not just the way things are as you seem to think."Because a force like gravity exists, a creator for the universe is not necessary"
~Stephen Hawking, The Grand Design.
You are very confused and I don't know how to point it out to you.Make up your mind.
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
even Hitchens said it was a good argument
The fine-tuning, that one degree, well, one degree, one hair different of nothing—that even though it doesn’t prove design, doesn’t prove a Designer, [the fine-tuning] could have all happened without [God]
The evidence for the unlikeliness is the fine tuning for crying out loud.I wasn't asking what you believe, I was asking for you to support your claim with actual evidence. For some reason you seem very hesitant to just tell us how unlikely you know our particular universe is.
No one believes that it is an argument from ignorance but the few atheists on this board.You've already responded to me saying this whole mess is an argument from ignorance. Not sure what would lead you to feel that I think I (or anyone else) have answers here.
I think others who actually read what is out there from experts in the field understand how unlikely. If you want to claim it isn't unlikely that is your opinion.
i know he doesn't believe it proves a designer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!He also said it didn't prove design or a designer. You agree with him, or is this another case of people you cite as experts disagreeing with you?
https://thetruthwillmakeyoumad.wordpress.com/2012/06/09/151/ :
Yep. That is what he thought but of course he didn't have evidence to show that gravity could exist when space, energy, matter and time didn't exist."Because a force like gravity exists, a creator for the universe is not necessary"
~Stephen Hawking, The Grand Design.
Because there are like over 30 parameters that make it that way which is highly improbable to come from chance.How do you calculate the probability of X being the way it is, if X is the only example you have and when it is unknown how X comes about?
So you believe only poorly educated people are the only ones that think the fine tuning argument for God is a good one?
The evidence for the unlikeliness is the fine tuning for crying out loud.
That's patently false :No one believes that it is an argument from ignorance but the few atheists on this board.
No, now see you are going to the conclusion rather than the evidence. Stephen Hawking does believe the fine tuning is real and is not just the way things are as you seem to think.
You are very confused and I don't know how to point it out to you.
i know he doesn't believe it proves a designer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He does believe what scientists say about the improbablity and unlikelihood of the universe coming about by chance.
Because there are like over 30 parameters that make it that way which is highly improbable to come from chance.
Because there are like over 30 parameters that make it that way which is highly improbable to come from chance.
How is it an intellectually dishonest way?In the sense that the workings of the universe are dependent on the values of the constants. Not in the loaded sense that a tuner was required, which is what you are adding to it in an intellectually dishonest way. As I have told you 20 pages ago.
Look at the links I've supplied.I didn't ask you a "why" question. So any answer that starts with "because" is not an answer to the question I asked.
I'll repeat:
How do you calculate the probability of X being the way it is, if X is the only example you have and when it is unknown how X comes about?
Please share the method by which this is done.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?