All believers in fine tuning have to believe that the initial conditions of the universe could have been different then they where. What evidence is there for that? I'll tell you. Zero evidence.
The fine-tuning argument rebutted: If the universe was entirely different, and the nature of matter was entirely different, the kinds of life that may have arisen would have been...wait for it...entirely different!
Life in our universe arose using what was available: energy and matter, and adheres perfectly to the constraints of that energy and matter...therefore...God did it? That's a really big leap of faith.
"The ideas that the multiverse is invented to oppose God, or that God is more plausible than it, are unsound"
Nothing could be more unsound than desperate atheists fantasizing about a theory to support their worldview. If such an ad hoc, unfalsifiable theory came out of a religious text it would be a laughing stock.
dude the multiverse theory came from mathematics that scientist are working on. Nobody made it up,..they just discovered it through math. We know that many scientific discoveries have been guided by mathematics i.e theory of relativity, etc..nobody made the multiverse just because theyre atheists. nevertheless, it could be wrong and they don't exist, but they have a good reason to think they do, because of the quantum flactuation and what might've caused the big bang. u shud read more into it
@simw7 The only thing is a science theory. Has to have observable and falsifiable or its just a useless theory. So far nobody as observe a graviton and these theories been around since the 1990's or earlier. In my view a Multiverse is no more provable then God or the easter bunny. Besides a Multiverses sucks in the comics.
The ideas that the multiverse is invented to oppose God, or that God is more plausible than it, are unsound, and the argument is never spelled out explicitly (which would have revealed its core weakness - creating life-supporting laws that are fine-tuned isn't part of what God does in traditional theology). Nevertheless, the discussion of Sober, which is the main point, is solid.
Thanks Newton 1692. I've enjoyed critiquing Sober on both cosmic and biological design arguments. The latter critique is in a recent edition of Philosophia Christi and the printed version of the arguments in this lecture will, I think, be available later this year in the same journal.
All believers in fine tuning have to believe that the initial conditions of the universe could have been different then they where. What evidence is there for that? I'll tell you. Zero evidence.
Hornadayfan 3 weeks ago
The fine-tuning argument rebutted: If the universe was entirely different, and the nature of matter was entirely different, the kinds of life that may have arisen would have been...wait for it...entirely different!
Life in our universe arose using what was available: energy and matter, and adheres perfectly to the constraints of that energy and matter...therefore...God did it? That's a really big leap of faith.
ChipArgyle 1 month ago
"The ideas that the multiverse is invented to oppose God, or that God is more plausible than it, are unsound"
Nothing could be more unsound than desperate atheists fantasizing about a theory to support their worldview. If such an ad hoc, unfalsifiable theory came out of a religious text it would be a laughing stock.
dashan091 11 months ago
@dashan091 moron
FIGHTFANNERD3 8 months ago
dude the multiverse theory came from mathematics that scientist are working on. Nobody made it up,..they just discovered it through math. We know that many scientific discoveries have been guided by mathematics i.e theory of relativity, etc..nobody made the multiverse just because theyre atheists. nevertheless, it could be wrong and they don't exist, but they have a good reason to think they do, because of the quantum flactuation and what might've caused the big bang. u shud read more into it
simw7 3 months ago
@simw7 The only thing is a science theory. Has to have observable and falsifiable or its just a useless theory. So far nobody as observe a graviton and these theories been around since the 1990's or earlier. In my view a Multiverse is no more provable then God or the easter bunny. Besides a Multiverses sucks in the comics.
Lone432345 3 weeks ago
The ideas that the multiverse is invented to oppose God, or that God is more plausible than it, are unsound, and the argument is never spelled out explicitly (which would have revealed its core weakness - creating life-supporting laws that are fine-tuned isn't part of what God does in traditional theology). Nevertheless, the discussion of Sober, which is the main point, is solid.
secularisrael 1 year ago
This response comes from Dr. Troy Nunley:
Thanks Newton 1692. I've enjoyed critiquing Sober on both cosmic and biological design arguments. The latter critique is in a recent edition of Philosophia Christi and the printed version of the arguments in this lecture will, I think, be available later this year in the same journal.
denversem 2 years ago
Thanks. I have been looking for remarks
on Elliot Sober.
Newton1692 2 years ago