(April 16, 2025 at 9:55 pm)Angrboda Wrote: He was posting over at AD a bit before he became active here again.

Yes, and with the same repetitious argument.

Now I will do what the Op and Drew failed to do. Present the pastafarian proof for fine tuning;



RAmen.

(April 16, 2025 at 3:47 pm)The Architect Of Fate Wrote:

Quote:No philosophical masturbation like the water in the puddle story? It takes a lot of whacking to convince oneself that has anything to do with the fine-tuning of the universe.

Nah the puddle analogy is valid and demonstrates any attempt asserting fine tuning is just as well explained by the reversal...

The fine-tuning crowd like to claim that the puddle analogy fails because the universe needs to be fine-tuned in order for water in order for there to be puddles. It's a failure to fully explore the possibilities, because you don't need water, you just need some fluid and a hole. We know this because we've discovered puddles (OK, lakes and seas) on Titan filled with liquid hydrocarbons and nitrogen. Mess with the fundamental constants and you'll probably get puddles of pentaquarks or something else exotic filling hollows in something else equally unusual. And every last one of them is going to marvel at how well-designed they must be in order to fit into their hole in the ground.

(April 17, 2025 at 12:51 am)Paleophyte Wrote:

(April 16, 2025 at 3:47 pm)The Architect Of Fate Wrote: Nah the puddle analogy is valid and demonstrates any attempt asserting fine tuning is just as well explained by the reversal...

The fine-tuning crowd like to claim that the puddle analogy fails because the universe needs to be fine-tuned in order for water in order for there to be puddles. It's a failure to fully explore the possibilities, because you don't need water, you just need some fluid and a hole. We know this because we've discovered puddles (OK, lakes and seas) on Titan filled with liquid hydrocarbons and nitrogen. Mess with the fundamental constants and you'll probably get puddles of pentaquarks or something else exotic filling hollows in something else equally unusual. And every last one of them is going to marvel at how well-designed they must be in order to fit into their hole in the ground.

They miss the point of the analogy were not literal puddle the analogy simply means whatever configuration that the universe took could have created some kind of life they often counter this by pointing out we currently  know of only one planet that has  spawned life or they point planets that are like ours didn't spawn life which doesn't help their case at all as life adapting doesn't mean it will always succeed even on similar planets to earth

(April 17, 2025 at 1:30 am)The Architect Of Fate Wrote:

(April 17, 2025 at 12:51 am)Paleophyte Wrote: The fine-tuning crowd like to claim that the puddle analogy fails because the universe needs to be fine-tuned in order for water in order for there to be puddles. It's a failure to fully explore the possibilities, because you don't need water, you just need some fluid and a hole. We know this because we've discovered puddles (OK, lakes and seas) on Titan filled with liquid hydrocarbons and nitrogen. Mess with the fundamental constants and you'll probably get puddles of pentaquarks or something else exotic filling hollows in something else equally unusual. And every last one of them is going to marvel at how well-designed they must be in order to fit into their hole in the ground.

They miss the point of the analogy were not literal puddle the analogy simply means whatever configuration that the universe took could have created some kind of life they often counter this by pointing out we currently  know of only one planet that has  spawned life or they point planets that are like ours didn't spawn life which doesn't help their case at all as life adapting doesn't mean it will always succeed even on similar planets to earth

And it really doesn't help their case any that of all the countless planets that exist we know of only one that has sprouted life. The universe is a pretty inefficient sentience generator if that's the case. You'd think that some AllMighty Creator would have made a universe where all planets would have life if that's what He was after, but hey, mysterious ways and all that BS.

The whole fine tuning this as evidence for a creator (any creator) is a big fat question begging - it assumes that life/intelligence was the goal of a creator, therefore, there MUST be a creator. This is just...silly.

Boru

Drew can no longer prove that he exists...