Fine Tuning of the Universe explained:
https://youtu.be/UpIiIaC4kRA
https://www.reasonablefaith.org/finetuning/


This phenomenon is something that Atheist hate to deal with. They hate to deal with the fact that the universe was designed and didn't just pop out of nothing, from nothing, by nothing.

Anyone that wants to ignore the facts around the Fine Tuning of the Universe is just dealing with Cognitive Dissonance



Added Bonus: The Kalam Cosmological Argument. You should watch this too.
https://youtu.be/6CulBuMCLg0

.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

The "facts around fine tuning" don't deal with *how* it happened. Which means it relies on an argument from ignorance to get from what is, to how what is came to be.

Which means, for all the "facts around fine tuning".. ..

You still have to fall back on faith.

It's not that atheists hate to deal with it, it's that it's a poor epistemological foundation for the conclusion.

Which means your statement that "Anyone that wants to ignore the facts around the Fine Tuning of the Universe is just dealing with Cognitive Dissonance" is somewhat ironic.

mentioned in the video. Really? Everyone that supports the Fine Tuning argument is wrong? They're all arguing the wrong point huh?


.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

Psst...

Your very question was sidestepping, and anything but straightforward.

Because you didn't deal with the content of my statement, which is that fine tuning describes what is, but doesn't get you to how what is became what it is. I pointed out a specific, and significant problem with the argument.

Instead of showing me something to prove that they presented evidence for the "how", you ran to...."so you think you're smarter than they are?"

Which is just about the mother of all sidesteps.

1. Do you believe that you are smarter learned than all the cosmologists & physicists mentioned in the video?

2. Is everyone that supports the Fine Tuning argument is wrong?

3. Are they arguing the wrong point?



.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

1. Do you believe that you are smarter learned than all the cosmologists & physicists mentioned in the video?

2. Is everyone that supports the Fine Tuning argument is wrong?

3. Are they arguing the wrong point?




.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

You haven't replied to the very real flaw that I pointed out with the argument.

No, you don't get to skate over it with this diversion.

Fine tuning tells us what is, not how it occurred.

Which means that it doesn't meet the burden of proving that the universe is tuned at all, let alone finely tuned.

Present evidence of the "how", the connective tissue between a god and the "fine tuned" universe. Skip all the talk about how if circumstances where other than they are, life as we know it wouldn't exist. fast forward past the masturbatory math.

Just get to the part that actually connects the existence of this world to a god.

I know what that is, by the way. Let's see if you can being yourself to say it.

You don't get to skip past this problem with the argument, and then press me to answer these diversionary questions.

>You haven't replied to the very real flaw that I pointed out
>with the argument.
>


Fin-Tuning is not my Theory, I agree with its basis and logic.


>No, you don't get to skate over it with this diversion.
>
>Fine tuning tells us what is, not how it occurred.
>

Fin-Tuning provides a theory of how the creation of the universe occurred. You just don't like the idea that God is the creator.



>Which means that it doesn't meet the burden of proving that
>the universe is tuned at all, let alone finely tuned.
>
>Present evidence of the "how", the connective tissue between a
>god and the "fine tuned" universe. Skip all the talk about how
>if circumstances where other than they are, life as we know it
>wouldn't exist. fast forward past the masturbatory math.
>

Again. What's your theory regarding the creation fo the universe?




.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

actually, I'll just tell you if you want. But then you have to pinky promise to tell me how it's NOT that logical fallacy

.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

you'll dazzle me with your intellect?

sit down man

You did it. That what. You can say that you didn't look to your left but we all know that you did. And now you haet the fact that you did. You can say that you didn't know it burns because you know that you did.

Look to the left again.

Go on. Do it.

Holding your head still won't help.

You know you want to do it.


.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

The Case_One Story

.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

it can't be detected, observed, measured, or proved.

replace multiverse with god. seems to be the same result.

>it can't be detected, observed, measured, or proved.
>
>replace multiverse with god. seems to be the same result.

So if you don't believe in God, what caused the Univers (matter, Time, space, etc to come into existence?




.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

https://image-cdn.hypb.st/https%3A%2F%2Fhypebeast.com%2Fimage%2F2019%2F07%2Fchance-the-rapper-the-big-store-day-album-pop-up-exhibit-0.jpg?fit=max&cbr=1&q=90&w=750&h=500

just like you don't. but I'm not filling the knowledge gap with something I 'believe' in and telling everyone else its fact.

I'm just trying to understand your perspective on this matter before we can go any further.


.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

so my speculation isn't based on facts.

we don't even know everything in the oceans. no way we currently know the full scope of the universe. again, I'm not filling those gaps with a belief system. nor am I trying to sell those beliefs to others.

>so my speculation isn't based on facts.
>
>we don't even know everything in the oceans. no way we
>currently know the full scope of the universe. again, I'm not
>filling those gaps with a belief system. nor am I trying to
>sell those beliefs to others.
>
>

You don't need to know everything that's in the ocean in order to know that the oceans are fed by other water sources and that have an origin. No one is asking about the complete contents of the universe. Folks are asking about the Universe itself.

Like, you can eat a piece of and not know what's all in it, but you know that it was made, even if you don't know who made it. An Atheist would hold the position that the cake just appeared out of thin air and that it has all ways been on the table.



.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

all the answers instead of making stuff up to fit his/her beliefs. can you do that?

its easy to find out the contents of cake. there's no mystery there. no need to guess at what's there. there's someone to ask that will have the answer. who are you asking about the universe? what answers did you get back?

>all the answers instead of making stuff up to fit his/her
>beliefs. can you do that?
>

Well to be fair everything is based on evidence, science, and scientific theory. To that point, someone cans say that they do not believe in God but based on the evidence, science, and scientific theory they can say that they believe in a higher power. Something can come from Ex Nihlio. The universe has to have a cause. Some Scientists call it the Big Bang, but the Big Bang had to have a Big Banger - some being that is changeless, immaterial, timeless, spaceless, and infinitely powerful


>its easy to find out the contents of cake. there's no mystery
>there. no need to guess at what's there. there's someone to
>ask that will have the answer. who are you asking about the
>universe? what answers did you get back?
>


It's only not a mystery because you have the current knowledge and tools to investigate it. But to my point, the simple analogy is based on the fact that you believe that someone made the cake even though you didn't see them make it. An Atheist would argue that it's always been there - Ex Nihlio.




.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

>the
>Big Bang had to have a Big Banger

sense. nobody would ever believe that to be true....unless its a twinkie lol.

there are too many unknowns about the universe and its beginnings/end/existence to put these simplistic theories on. and you're carrying forward this comparison between something that isn't mystery at all? c'mon man.

this is why folks say you're disingenuous. you simply can't bring yourself to say you don't know and nobody else does either. none of us know that answers either, but some of us are ok with that.

See, since you couldn't handle a simple analogy without trying to be a smart alec, you going to have to work the heck out of Google today.

Now, answer this simple question. Do you believe the Universe always existed?

.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

we have clear answers to one, but not the other. doesn't work.


my answer is still I don't know.

Concepts my Gee. You gotta be able to use concepts. The actual product is not an issue for you because of your social location and worldview.

And "I don't know" is a poor excuse for a grown person when it comes to asking them what they believe. I didn't ask you to prove anything I asked what do you belive.




.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

it doesn't matter the man made object. the 5 why's are can usually be answered for just about anything that we create. what you present, mere existence, doesn't count as evidence for what you're arguing. the only fact in that is that the universe is real. you can't give me the any answers about the universe beyond that.

Do you think the Universe has always existed or was it created? It's a simple opinion question. You have enough information to provide an opinion beyond saying "I don't know."

You can even give a probability statement. But you choose to go with the "I Don't know" even though you see the universe and there's Philosophical and Scientific theories for multiple answers.

Come on Jack!




.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

the scientist don't have answers. our observatory tools can only do so much right now. and haven't provided solid conclusions.

I'm ok with saying that I have no clue if it always existed or if something kicked it off.

.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

Translation:

He exercised critical thinking and took note of a significant problem with your analogy.... if you want to call it that.

Thing is, I know exactly what you're doing.

All you're doing is presenting an even dumber than usual iteration of the Watchmaker argument remixing the ingredients doesn't make the argument any better.

There's a reason you won't address the actual criticism of the argument.

Like I said, you engage in a way that suggests a system, some predetermined format. At a minimum, you are not at all an honest actor, and converse with an agenda to control the flow and narrative, rather than engaging with the natural flow of the discussion.

Dude can debate a simple cake analog that a 3rd grader can understand but can't give an opinion about his beliefs regarding the creation of the universe. I ain't ask e the joker to be the know all be all. I just asked his-riddle-me-this-opinion barbershop opinion. Dang, you can't major in the minor and sidestep everything else.


Fine-Tuning is just a theory like every other, Intelligent Design theory or the Big Bang theory. I asked you and ya, buddy, to tell me what yo believe and all you can do is debate the question. Typical.


.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

You used a really bad analogy.

It says a lot that you mentioned that a 3rd grader would understand the analogy, in relation to your complaints about him being a "smart alec" and "know it all".

You're actively taking issue with the use of critical thinking, because that makes it much more difficult to maintain an elementary level of discussion...which is where you very clearly want this to remain.

You then take issue with his refusal to offer up an opinion, after he readily admitted his ignorance to the question.

Not only do you take issue with his application of critical- and correct- thinking in response to your analogy, you have an issue with his refusal to present a willfully ignorant opinion.

Your discussion with him is perhaps the best example of how badly your indoctrination has poisoned your epistemology.

This may be your worst showing on this subject ever on these boards.

>You used a really bad analogy.
>

Cool. It's a Bad Analogy. That's the opinion for a person that has no opinion on the actual subject. That's rich.

I provided a clear video that explained the Fin-Tuning Theory and that cat had no option. So I provided a "silly little analogy" because pictures, words, and sound seemed to no do the trick. And the analogy became the focus instead of the actual subject. GTHOHWTBS. Y'all got me messed up.

And for slowing myself down to give some Goofy analogy you're trying to challenge my intellect. Dude Please. You know better than that.





.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

>sense. nobody would ever believe that to be true....unless
>its a twinkie lol.

We know, more or less, how they're made and what they're made of, to the degree that even a child can make a cake without much problem.

We have overwhelming evidence of not just the existence of cakes, but also the various recipes for the multitude of types of cakes that exist.

It's a process we can not only observe, but in which we can also participate.

Conversely, for the universe, we have only the existence of this one universe, with a finite scope of observation. We have exponentially less evidence showing how the universe came into existence than we have for any one of the innumerable cakes that have existed.

It's not even an apples to oranges comparison, it's birthday cakes to a universe.

.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

You keep regurgitating the same misconception.

An atheist doesn't think the cake pops out of existence from nothing.
Nor does an atheist necessarily think the universe pops up from nothing. Your cake analogy is a poor one, for reasons I already laid out. As far as the universe as it rates to lack of a belief in a god, "the atheist", generally speaking, would simply say that we don't know how the universe came into existence.

That's it.

You've taken an additional step of claiming to know what that cause was, and then taking that a step further to say that you know that cause personally.

With you, it's intellectuall dishonesty at every turn.

Anyhow, you don't know what an atheist believes, other than they don't believe in god..

Atheists aren't a monolithic group, anymore than Christians. After all I've had plenty of quality discussions with Christians and other theists who are honest and don't employ the snake-like disigenousness tactics that you do.

>Nor does an atheist necessarily think the universe pops up
>from nothing.

So, how did the universe come into being?




.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

You engage in a wa that suggests that you've taken a course/seminar/ etc that teaches a very rigid do/don't, if/then format.

Your approach conveys adherence to some sort of "5 steps to engage with unbelievers", or some similar step-by-step instruction. I know for a fact you've tried at least one well-known tact, that was so egregious and obvious I literally laughed out loud before calling you out on it. X

I'm sure you engage like a thoughtful human being when you're in a bubble of self affirmation, but outside of that, you just don't have the ability or desire.

You do not genuinely respond directly to with the things people actually say. You ignore or dismiss wholesale everything that doesn't fit you're preconceptions, and redirect in a way that indicates intent to control the discussion, rather then participate.

You asked a question I've directly, clearly answered, twice.

You're an unfortunate example of deep-rooted indoctrination in action.

When they both fail on a common criteria.

Multiverse: reject, because no scientific evidence to support it
God: accept, despite no scientific evidence to support it

of the existence of our present universe and the cause from which it has its beginning. The Multiverse argument has no evidence of an existence period that can even be related to a cause.

The two arguments that you're making are unrelated.


.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

>So if you don't believe in God, what caused the Univers
>(matter, Time, space, etc to come into existence?

Who knows? There is, as yet, no sufficient answer got that question.
You don't get to just plug in the answer you want to be true, and then pretend that it's true.

The intellectually honest answer is: he, I, you, we, don't know.

You cannot cite god as the cause of the universe if you cannot prove the existence of god. You're trying to solve a mystery by appealing to a different mystery.

Since you don't believe in God, what caused the Univers (matter, Time, space, etc to come into existence?






.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

backed into a corner.


.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

That's really, really clear.

It's crystal clear.

There is zero room for interpretation there.

I understand that your indoctrination compels a great deal of your dishonesty, but goddamn man.

Fucking try for once.

would you choose going back and forth with case over the validity of a youtube video

or


any other thing

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

Man you say at my doorstep.


.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

I don't understand.

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

Anti-gentrification, cheap alcohol & trying to look pretty in our twilight posting years (c) Big Reg

¨Your mother is Colin Powell¨ - Lurkmode

www.Tupreme.com

and really knows how it fits together, at the level of real mathematical thought and scientific evidence, as opposed to the simplistic and misleading translations found in Youtube videos and popularizations; just about every single one of the real scientists in the world of cosmology are atheists.

And the (very) few who actually do believe in the existence some kind of supernatural being are not making any sort of scientific argument (fine-tuning or otherwise), because they're especially aware that you can't make scientific arguments for the supernatural, by definition.

>
>and really knows how it fits together, at the level of real
>mathematical thought and scientific evidence, as opposed to
>the simplistic and misleading translations found in Youtube
>videos and popularizations; just about every single one of the
>real scientists in the world of cosmology are atheists.

What part of the fine-tuning argument does scientists oppose?



>
>And the (very) few who actually do believe in the existence
>some kind of supernatural being are not making any sort of
>scientific argument (fine-tuning or otherwise), because
>they're especially aware that you can't make scientific
>arguments for the supernatural, by definition.
>

Do you believe in the supernatural?



.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

Do you call asking questions arguing? And if stravinskian is physicist, cool, I don't know you or this person. So hold your own water.

But if stravinskian is a physicist the questions should not be hard regarding the fine tuning observation.





.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

To quote him:

"everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that some spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe, one that is vastly superior to that of man. In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort, which is surely quite different from the religiosity of someone more naive."



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

Not being snarky. I'm just not sure what you're getting at because you appear to have accidentally left out a word.

At any rate, he did have a somewhat nuanced take, though not particularly in the ways that people often think he did. His language about wonder and awe were more about communicating the innate value of science than about caving to the cultural imposition of standardized pictures of the supernatural. Right in that very quote, he said (and he often repeated) that the belief in a thinking, caring, anthropomorphic God is "naive."

Your quote comes from a letter replying to a child who asked if scientists pray. Obviously he wasn't gonna say to a child that she's wasting her time, being irrational, taking fairy tales seriously. But he came surprisingly close:

"Scientific research is based on the assumption that all events, including the actions of mankind, are determined by the laws of nature. Therefore, a research scientist will hardly be inclined to believe that events could be influenced by a prayer, that is, by a wish addressed to a supernatural Being."

It IS true that Einstein held great reverence and wonder for the (still mysterious) fact that the universe appears to operate under fixed, self-consistent, and impersonal rules. He also had great humility regarding the fact that there will never be such a thing as "complete" knowledge, even with regard to those aspects of the world for which new knowledge will always be available (the "natural" world). I share all of these feelings, as do all of the scientists I've ever worked with.

But while Einstein regarded these as "a kind of" religious feeling, we should note that they are QUITE different from what he called "the religiosity of someone more naive." Religion claims to answer questions that, by definition, cannot be answered. That is not wonder and it's definitely not humility. While Einstein himself danced around between a few different words in his time (varying with the context of the conversation more than anything), by the standards of American language in the 21st century, Einstein was an atheist.

By:by Richard E. Simmons III,


When the famous atheist Christopher Hitchens was once asked what the strongest argument was against his atheistic belief, he responded:

“I think every one of us picks the “fine-tuning” one as the most intriguing . . . it is not a trivial argument. We (atheists) all say that.”

Fine-tuning, as it applies to the universe, is the idea that the conditions that allow life to exist in the universe can occur only when certain universal constants lie within a very narrow range of values. If any of several constants were only slightly different, the universe would be unlikely to be conducive to the establishment of life.

All modern scientists agree that the universe seems to be fine-tuned for life. There are so many features in our universe that, if they were slightly different, life could not exist. The universe in which we live gives the appearance of having been designed with incredible precision.

For instance, there are 31 constants in physics that seem to be set just right, and these fundamental constants are set just right for life to exist. Furthermore, these constants are completely unrelated. Douglas Ell uses the analogy of walking into a control room for the universe and finding 31 separate dials that have been set with great precision for the existence of life.

Sir Fred Hoyle, the British astronomer and one of the twentieth century’s most significant scientific thinkers, said:

“A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.”

According to Vince Vitale, Hoyle was an atheist but that the fine-tuning of the universe left him “greatly shaken.”

Paul Davies, an agnostic physicist says:

“There is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all … it seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature’s numbers to make the universe. The impression of design is overwhelming.”

Even the noted physicist and cosmologist Stephen Hawking was impressed with the fine-tuning he saw in the universe.

“The laws of science, as we know them at present, contain many fundamental numbers, like the size of the electric charge of the electron and the ratio of the masses of the proton and the electron … The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life.”

So what does all this mean? Well there certainly is disagreement, but no scientists disagree with the existence of fine-tuning. In fact in the field of physics it is considered a scientific fact.

So how do scientists who do not believe in the existence of God account for this type of design on such a grand scale? Some of their beliefs are quite incredible.

Andrei Linde, a physicist at Stanford University has thrown out the possibility that the universe has been designed and produced by some super-technological alien culture.

Astrophysicist John Gribbin sides with Linde believing it is possible that “our universe is an artificial construct, manufactured deliberately by intelligent beings in another universe.”

Even the world’s most prominent atheist, Richard Dawkins, believes this to be a possibility. When asked in an interview,

“What do you think is the possibility that intelligent design might turn out to be the answer to some issues in genetics or in evolution?” And Dawkins responded,

“Well, it could come about in the following way. It could be that at some earlier time, somewhere in the universe, a civilization evolved . . . to a very, very high level of technology, and designed a form of life that they seeded onto, perhaps, this planet. Now that is a possibility, and an intriguing possibility. And I suppose it’s possible that you might find evidence for that if you look at the details of biochemistry and molecular biology; you might find the signature of some sort of designer.”

I was shocked when I read this. In one sense all of these men acknowledge some form of intelligent design from super intelligent aliens from a far off universe. However you have to wonder what type of alien being could fulfill the role of fine-tuner of the universe.

It seems they do not have a problem believing some form of intelligent design and designer, they just refuse to believe in God, the divine intelligent designer.

I sometimes wonder if the problem of the modern skeptic is not that he does not believe in God, but that in his heart of hearts does not want there to be a God. As the noted philosopher Thomas Nagel of New York University put it:

“I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are religious believers. It isn’t just that I don’t believe in God and naturally. It’s that I hope there is no God! I don’t want there to be a God; I don’t want the universe to be like that.”

This is what the brilliant philosopher and mathematician Blaise Pascal observed, “that people almost invariably arrive at their beliefs not on the basis of proof but on the basis of what they find attractive.”

>“that people almost invariably
>arrive at their beliefs not on the basis of proof but on the
>basis of what they find attractive.”

...a christian apologist who firmly believes in fairytales is not someone who can be debated by actual astrophysicists ..his videos are just about the cringiest things ever

.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

Anti-gentrification, cheap alcohol & trying to look pretty in our twilight posting years (c) Big Reg

¨Your mother is Colin Powell¨ - Lurkmode

www.Tupreme.com

Do tell.



.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

"Those who think that the uniquely life-permitting values of the universe's physical constants prove theism are mistaken for at least two reasons. First, they assume that the supernatural fine-tuning of these constants must be due to God, which is patently false—one or more other supernatural beings could just as easily be responsible for the fine-tuning. Second, that the uniquely life-permitting values of the universe's physical constants are due to chance is ruled out based on the improbability—not the impossibility—of them having these values by chance."

as i said: https://image-cdn.hypb.st/https%3A%2F%2Fhypebeast.com%2Fimage%2F2019%2F07%2Fchance-the-rapper-the-big-store-day-album-pop-up-exhibit-0.jpg?fit=max&cbr=1&q=90&w=750&h=500

"The actual values of the constants could very well be due to chance despite this extreme improbability; so even if supernatural fine-tuning could only be due to God, it would only be probable (and thus not proven) that God exists since it is only probable that the constants were supernaturally fine-tuned to their actual values."

https://infidels.org/library/modern/ryan_stringer/fine-tuning.html

https://infidels.org/library/modern/ryan_stringer/fine-tuning.html
.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

if you assume that a being did design the universe then it can be one of many beings. that would make it unlikely that the being is the god you believe it is. what reasoning is there that it is the god you believe it is?

even though it is improbably that the universe is how it is due to chance it is not impossible that it is. what reasoning is there that it is impossible that it is just chance?

... "A Beautiful Struggle"
https://m.facebook.com/jamelabullock
Www.reverbnation.com/jamela

MELa
Musically.Entertaining.Lyrically.Alluring.

.

You have mistaken for someone that cares about what you've ever thought.


.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

Granted, he's still a dishonest, disingenuous snake.

I posted about getting called into the office for being less that friendly toward a woman who I couldn't walk past without her asking me a million questions about whatever case she was working on, despite the fact that we have a whole department for that exact thing.

She never knew anything about anything, ever, and she needed to either learn how to do the job, or use the resources we're given, and not use me as her personal handbook.

So not only is he showing his true self by devolving into these sorts of personal jabs, he's giving us a glimpse of that extra layer of awful inside him by blatantly misrepresenting the situation.

He has zero integrity.

You didn't need to explain that incident. We've all have some sort of run-in with a co-worker or two. Shoot, people are not always gonna jive. But now you're in your feeling over a simple question.


.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

You are a terrible person.

He's miserable now. If I wan to talk about him, I'd talk about his NOW. THere's enough here today to talk about. But I don't.


.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

What is it about my responses that you don like?

Let's talk since you have nothing to say about the actual OP.




.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

I was just asking if he was still having a lot of problems.


.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

Way to spread that message of love

I asked you a simple question. But yet again, as usual, You can't even answer that without sidestepping and defecting.


.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

I've already closed out my last project release for the year, so I'm bored, but not lonely. My wife is here too. We've been closing around and having some fun.


.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

Pointing out those agendas and unpacking the baggage is hardly the act of a victim :)


Rather, it's the act of someone who is happy to help you show off just how horrible you really are.

https://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13357215&mesg_id=13357215&listing_type=search#13357472

you're much more diplomatic in your responses than I was in the above post. You might be the closest thing we have to a saint here.

>https://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13357215&mesg_id=13357215&listing_type=search#13357472
>
>you're much more diplomatic in your responses than I was in
>the above post. You might be the closest thing we have to a
>saint here.

I asked you a simple question, one that get's asked of me when I voice my opinions on the military. I've never taken any offense to the question because some folks just want to know a vets opinion. I just wanted to know if you've served, and to get your further opinion if you were a vet.

Y'all soft dudes are full of feelings that have not been addressed.


.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

and two things only: attention and control.

Every single thing you boils down to those two things. So you can name call. You can deflect and you can distract. But the fact remains that's who and what you are.

I don't answer your questions because I know you don't care about my answers or the answers of any people here.

You just want attention and you just want control.

Cold Truth got you to cop to it earlier. Deep down in your empty little heart and your vacant little mind, you think God wants those same two things too: attention and control. In your mind, God isn't loving or vengeful, he's abusive. That's why you love abusers and enable abusers. That's why abuse is your Love Language. You love to take it, you LOVE to give it. And abuse is first and foremost about control.

If God is entitled to those two things, and you're a 'man of God' then in your diseased little mind you are entitled to them too. To you, attention and control bring you closer to God. That's why you only act in bad faith. Because YOUR faith is fundamentally flawed. And you know it is. That's why you're always seeking out and trotting out somebody to confirm your faith as fact. Because your faith is as fragile as your ego.

You don't really believe. If you did, you wouldn't be who you are. You wouldn't do what you do or say what you do if you did.

More importantly, you certainly don't really want us to believe. Not in God at least. That's why you're always dredging up "proof". Because, to you, if you can prove God is you'll be the real miracle worker. Then finally see, then we'll finally believe. We'll believe in you. I hate to break it to you but that's not how this story plays out. You know it too.

You mentioned our feelings. I'll take feelings over your emptiness of heart, spirt, and mind 11 times out of 10. I don't even think you have feelings outside of fear and hunger. Fear you won't get the attention you so desperately crave and hunger for control you'll never really possess.

May God have mercy on your whatever he gave you instead of a soul.

>RE: You are driven by two things and two things only
>and two things only: attention and control.
>
>Every single thing you boils down to those two things. So you
>can name call. You can deflect and you can distract. But the
>fact remains that's who and what you are.
>
>I don't answer your questions because I know you don't care
>about my answers or the answers of any people here.
>
>You just want attention and you just want control.
>
>Cold Truth got you to cop to it earlier. Deep down in your
>empty little heart and your vacant little mind, you think God
>wants those same two things too: attention and control. In
>your mind, God isn't loving or vengeful, he's abusive. That's
>why you love abusers and enable abusers. That's why abuse is
>your Love Language. You love to take it, you LOVE to give it.
>And abuse is first and foremost about control.
>
>If God is entitled to those two things, and you're a 'man of
>God' then in your diseased little mind you are entitled to
>them too. To you, attention and control bring you closer to
>God. That's why you only act in bad faith. Because YOUR faith
>is fundamentally flawed. And you know it is. That's why you're
>always seeking out and trotting out somebody to confirm your
>faith as fact. Because your faith is as fragile as your ego.
>
>You don't really believe. If you did, you wouldn't be who you
>are. You wouldn't do what you do or say what you do if you
>did.
>
>More importantly, you certainly don't really want us to
>believe. Not in God at least. That's why you're always
>dredging up "proof". Because, to you, if you can prove God is
>you'll be the real miracle worker. Then finally see, then
>we'll finally believe. We'll believe in you. I hate to break
>it to you but that's not how this story plays out. You know it
>too.
>
>You mentioned our feelings. I'll take feelings over your
>emptiness of heart, spirt, and mind 11 times out of 10. I
>don't even think you have feelings outside of fear and hunger.
>Fear you won't get the attention you so desperately crave and
>hunger for control you'll never really possess.
>
>May God have mercy on your whatever he gave you instead of a
>soul.
>

*skatin' the rings of saturn*


..and miles to go before i sleep...

Sometimes things are just what they are and there are no hidden agendas.


But do tell, what is my agenda?


.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

>RE: If you live though agenda lenses then you'll get what you want.

LOLOLOLOL.

Horrible, terrible person.

I guess you want to argue this fact too.


.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

.
.

“It was the evidence from science and history that prompted me to abandon my atheism and become a Christian.” — Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ

The Case for Christ Lecture: https://youtu.be/67uj2qvQi_k

Good News: https://www.goodnewsnetwork

And still celebrates when they go platinum