(April 6, 2025 at 1:54 pm)Nay_Sayer Wrote: If anyone is wondering about Orders amazing pm. It's remarkably underwhelming and doesn't contain any evidence.

Feel free to drop your most sincere shocked face

Thanks for taking a bullet for the gang.

GrandizerII

(April 6, 2025 at 12:35 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: Fine, you're a multiverse person. Most atheists aren't willing to concede the multiverse theory is necessary and because there is no direct evidence of other universes. I respect it as a plausible theory and an explanation for fine-tuning of the universe for life. However, it also multiplies entities to infinity and beyond ala Occams razor. I consider it the ultimate time and chance, naturalism in the gaps theory.

Quote:Also, multiple worlds doesn't mean less simplicity. One could argue the addition of a supernatural being to what is otherwise a natural reality is what violates Occam's razor.

Occams razor isn't about simplicity, its about unnecessarily multiplying entities.

Quote:Also, people subscribe to a multiverse view for various rational reasons, and not because they need it to explain something like the assumed "fine-tuning" of this local universe. Even some theists have argued for a multiverse view in favour of God because of things like the principle of sufficient reason.

There are other reasons such as the double slit experiment which gives rise to the idea every decision leads to a new universe. There are reasons to think cosmic inflation occurred and some theorize that process goes on to create other universes. Or that our universe includes pocket universes in which there are different laws of physics. No matter how you slice it along with it comes the explanation for fine-tuning of the universe. Its is part and parcel with the theory of multiverse. They almost act like fine-tuning is evidence of other universes...its not. The fine-tuning of this universe didn't cause other universes to exist. The best evidence of other universes is the existence of this one and we observe things in multiples all the time such as other galaxies.
 
AI says...
The multiverse theory, which posits the existence of many universes with varying physical laws and constants, is often proposed as a naturalistic explanation for the apparent "fine-tuning" of our universe, suggesting that life-supporting conditions are merely a result of us inhabiting a universe that happens to be conducive to life. However, some argue that the multiverse itself requires fine-tuning, thus potentially undermining its explanatory power. 

Quote:There is no direct evidence of God either, so we're even.

That's right. So it goes back to what we do know a universe came into existence that was able to cause intelligent life to exist. Scientists know a host of improbable events, properties and circumstances obtained for a life happy planet like earth to exist. When folks say we owe the existence of the universe to natural causes they can't mean the natural forces we're familiar with in space-time. Those natural forces are what came into existence. I assume they just mean other forces that unintentionally came into existence and unintentionally caused a universe to exist and had no intention of causing intelligent life to exist. That's a very tall drink of water and that's why even non-religious people think our existence was intentionally caused. Including a lot of scientists. 

Quote:The multiverse is just as much about "chance" as God is. Is God "chance"? Nope? Then good luck arguing the multiverse (without God) is any different in this case.

Its not about chances which are incalculable, its about what explanation explains best. Most atheists I run into deny there is a need for multiverse.

(April 6, 2025 at 1:26 pm)Angrboda Wrote:

(April 6, 2025 at 12:57 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: Do you agree the existence of the universe was either intentionally caused or unintentionally caused to exist? So either Goddidit or Naturedidit is more plausible than any other theory since one or the other is true. What's counter intuitive about the universe having been intentionally caused to exist? Scientists have caused the virtual universe to exist. Some day they many populate with virtual people who experience reality as we do. Alan Guth believes scientists maybe able to cause a universe to exist. If they can would you concede it was intentionally caused?

Virtual universes weren't timelessly caused.  As for the rest, it's not even germane as you're not responding to the central point in any meaningful sense.

I'll let our unbiased readers decide if I responded. Or if you made any salient point.

Ok... a god made everything that exists, where was he before he did it?

I'm getting lots of responses. I don't have time for shop worn, one line zingers you plagiarized. I'm here for serious discussion if anyone is interested.

I disagreed with the OP. There is evidence in favor of Godidit and Naturedidit. Evidence are facts that make a claim more probable. They aren't proof in and of themselves.

(April 6, 2025 at 2:07 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote:

(April 6, 2025 at 1:26 pm)Angrboda Wrote: Virtual universes weren't timelessly caused.  As for the rest, it's not even germane as you're not responding to the central point in any meaningful sense.

I'll let our unbiased readers decide if I responded. Or if you made any salient point.

I’ll have opt out of that one, due to my raft of biases. 

Boru

(April 6, 2025 at 2:14 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: I'm getting lots of responses. I don't have time for shop worn, one line zingers you plagiarized. I'm here for serious discussion if anyone is interested.

I disagreed with the OP. There is evidence in favor of Godidit and Naturedidit. Evidence are facts that make a claim more probable. They aren't proof in and of themselves.

Again, arguments are not evidence. When your premise is identical to your conclusion, you’ll eventually become so dizzy that you end up vomiting logical fallacies all over your shoes (I’m gonna guess penny loafers).

Boru

Drew_2013 Wrote:When folks say we owe the existence of the universe to natural causes they can't mean the natural forces we're familiar with in space-time. Those natural forces are what came into existence.

You are just playing semantics here. It has nothing to do with evidence or logic but just some parlor tricks.

I tell you this, black holes could very well be (other) baby universes if not whole universes by themselves with different natural forces in them and they were created by natural forces (as was subsequently our universe).

(April 6, 2025 at 1:10 pm)Deesse23 Wrote:

(April 6, 2025 at 1:00 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: So you noticed...what about it? You don't think I noticed you never answer any of my questions?

Says the guy who does not answer my questions? Nice try. This is not your congregation where you respond to uncomfortable questions with questions. THis is a place where you get grilled for not answering.
Did or did you not create a specific thread over at AD to tell how hate of religion drives atheists away from theism, and not intellectual honesty. Did or did you not tell people what they think, in the face of evidence to the contrary?

Lets start from this premise, I don't give a shit what anyone thinks, especially you. I offered the opinion (which I'm not backing down from) that many atheists come to despise religion, religious people and then as a result come to disbelieve in the existence of God. I offer my opinions on anything I feel like. Do you want people to challenge atheism on this discussion board or you just want an echo chamber for you to bellyache in?

(April 6, 2025 at 2:14 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: I'm getting lots of responses. I don't have time for shop worn, one line zingers you plagiarized. I'm here for serious discussion if anyone is interested.

I disagreed with the OP. There is evidence in favor of Godidit and Naturedidit. Evidence are facts that make a claim more probable. They aren't proof in and of themselves.

I opt out then. There is nothing to discuss if you are simply unwilling to drop your incredulity even for a second, even for the sake of argument.