The fine tuning of the universe.

[AirPo]

The evidence is the fine tuning.

Empirical evidence is information acquired by observation or experimentation. This data is recorded and analyzed by scientists and is a central process as part of the scientific method.

Conclusion: a judgment or decision reached by reasoning.

That's not evidence. It's a subjective, qualitative, misleading lable of the evidence. Your conclusion is not a judgment or decision reached by reasoning. It's wishful thinking.

 

[AirPo]

Actually you all either dismiss the actual fine tuning of the universe which is supported by scientists in the field. Then you claim there is no evidence but the evidence is the fine tuning. Then you all assert I'm wrong in my conclusion without giving anything but opinion to show I'm wrong.

Execpt pointing out all the flaws.

 

[AirPo]

No wishful thinking is that the appearance of design is not actual and can be shown to be an illusion.

No one denies the appearance. We just point out that means nothing other then it appears that way.

 

[AirPo]

If that satisfies you then by all means you are free to dismiss the facts.

Do you not agree that if things were different they'd be different?

 

[Veera Chase]

Do you not agree that if things were different they'd be different?

No that's wrong, if things were different they would be the same only different.
A God becomes real when believers believe in one, if they should change their minds the new one then becomes real and the first one stops being real.

I read it here I think, a believer is more powerful than their God because they can make their God disappear simply by not believing in it, that's not true of course because the God was never there in the first place.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Execpt pointing out all the flaws.

You haven't pointed out any flaws other than trying to claim things about the fine tuning are wrong that scientists have already determined.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Do you not agree that if things were different they'd be different?

Yes, I agree and if they were different we wouldn't be having this discussion...which is the point.

 

[Oncedeceived]

No that's wrong, if things were different they would be the same only different.
A God becomes real when believers believe in one, if they should change their minds the new one then becomes real and the first one stops being real.

I read it here I think, a believer is more powerful than their God because they can make their God disappear simply by not believing in it, that's not true of course because the God was never there in the first place.

This isn't true. If you know God exists, you don't suddenly know He doesn't. You may believe that He exists and then change that belief but there is a difference between knowing and belief.

 

[AirPo]

You haven't pointed out any flaws other than trying to claim things about the fine tuning are wrong that scientists have already determined.

Sure I have, multiple times.

 

[AirPo]

Yes, I agree and if they were different we wouldn't be having this discussion...which is the point.

Then my post was not "dismissing the facts," was it?

 

[Oncedeceived]

Sure I have, multiple times.

Restate them please.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Then my post was not "dismissing the facts," was it?

Yes, it is. The fact that if there were different it would be different dismisses much of the argument.

 

[AirPo]

Restate them please.

For at least the third time, fine tuning assumes that the parameters can be changed/different. There is nothing that suggests that this is true. Basing an argument on an unsupportrd assummption is flawed.

 

[AirPo]

Yes, it is. The fact that if there were different it would be different dismisses much of the argument.

No, it just points out that fine tuning isn't a real argument to start with.

 

[crjmurray]

Sure I have, multiple times.

It's true, I've seen him do it.

 

[KCfromNC]

Total dismissal of the author himself claiming that the approach is valid

What approach? You still have presented nothing which demonstrates that actual scientists use this idea to figure out the odds that our universe ended up the way it did. All you did was name drop it.

 

[KCfromNC]

We know that there was nothing and then there was a universe. This universe is precisely fine tuned to exist and to allow life to exist in it. We don't need to know how universes form to know that ours came out of nothing to something and that included space, matter, energy and time. So how it originated doesn't change that the values it has are precisely what they need to be for this universe to exist and life in it as well.

Yes, I already said if things were different they'd be different. How does that lead you to the conclusion that baby Jesus loves us very much?

 

[Veera Chase]

This isn't true. If you know God exists, you don't suddenly know He doesn't. You may believe that He exists and then change that belief but there is a difference between knowing and belief.

There is such a thing as being sure something is true then after finding out something you didn't know makes you not so sure it's true, if you find out even more then you stop being sure completely.
Do you honestly think all of the ex Christians there are around were never really Christians they just thought they were?
they were as convinced as you are once, after all you don't have any evidence do you? all you have is the bible stories and other peoples testimonies.

More than 10 million children die each year, most from preventable causes and almost all in poor countries. Six countries account for 50% of worldwide deaths in children younger than 5 years, and 42 countries for 90%.
According to your beliefs their deaths should be cause for celebration because they are all going to join your God,
all child deaths everywhere should be celebrated in Christian countries.

 

[KCfromNC]

I've provided support through various links. You just seem to dismiss them all.

Yes, I typically do that when the person presenting the links hasn't even read them. Or can't tell me what the answer the links provide. Had any luck yet actually finding a paper where cosmologists calculate the odds that our universe ended up like it did? For some reason you seem very hesitant to just tell us what those odds are despite claiming that you know. That's pretty suspicious.

I don't even know what you are referring to here.

I doubt that.

 

[KCfromNC]

Yes, it is. The fact that if there were different it would be different dismisses much of the argument.

Again you're confusing your flawed argument for god with the scientific facts that actual scientists actually write about. They're two totally different things.