I will prove to you that God exists

[The Architect Of Fate]

This guy just keeps stepping on the rake

[Mister Agenda]

Or that the physical constants of universes are constrained. Just sayin'.

They wouldn't be called constants otherwise. The irony of this argument is its the preferred explanation for why we live in a universe that is fine-tuned for life is because they claim we live in an infinitude of universes with variable constants and we exist in the one that allowed our existence by happenstance. As if none of these scientists considered the possibility that it had to come out as it did. They reject that because it wouldn't look any different than being intentionally caused to be this way to produce life.

Pretty sure they don't reject it, many worlds is just a hypothesis, after all. It may be more entertaining to think about alternate worlds than 'the universe is the way it is because that's the only way it can be'; but at this point there's no way to test either hypothesis.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Perhaps I must share some culpability, for asking 7 questions, lets try one at a time, see if that helps simplify things for him. 

@Drew_2013

What is your criteria for disbelief? What I mean is, why do you disbelieve something, rather than believe it?

Is this an official interrogation? Should I put a bright spot light on myself while I answer? Can I take the 5th? 

What's your take on the question?

I can't make a blanket answer except on a case by case basis. I disbelieve UFO's are from another planet or galaxy because the distances are so far. A disbelief is no different than a belief...its an opinion. I could be wrong and aliens maybe so far advanced that they have technology that would make us blush. The available evidence is (my opinion) is too weak to justify the belief they come from other planets.

I hope I passed the audition!

That wasn’t the question, though, was it? I think Sheldon was asking what, if anything, is your standard for disbelieve generally. If you don’t have such a standard, that’s fine, but it makes any argument regarding your beliefs inherently weak.

Boru

[Nay_Sayer]

Perhaps I must share some culpability, for asking 7 questions, lets try one at a time, see if that helps simplify things for him. 

@Drew_2013

What is your criteria for disbelief? What I mean is, why do you disbelieve something, rather than believe it?

Is this an official interrogation? Should I put a bright spot light on myself while I answer? Can I take the 5th? 

What's your take on the question?

I can't make a blanket answer except on a case by case basis. I disbelieve UFO's are from another planet or galaxy because the distances are so far. A disbelief is no different than a belief...its an opinion. I could be wrong and aliens maybe so far advanced that they have technology that would make us blush. The available evidence is (my opinion) is too weak to justify the belief they come from other planets.

I hope I passed the audition!

0/10 womp womp

[Drew_2013]

Even if, IF, the watchmaker fallacy was somehow proof that a deity existed, where's the proof that it was your particular god?

I don't have any particular God. I'm a philosophical theist. What we think of as God could be a scientist in another sphere of existence that caused this universe.

[The Architect Of Fate]

Your a vague theist

[Drew_2013]

Is this an official interrogation? Should I put a bright spot light on myself while I answer? Can I take the 5th? 

What's your take on the question?

I can't make a blanket answer except on a case by case basis. I disbelieve UFO's are from another planet or galaxy because the distances are so far. A disbelief is no different than a belief...its an opinion. I could be wrong and aliens maybe so far advanced that they have technology that would make us blush. The available evidence is (my opinion) is too weak to justify the belief they come from other planets.

I hope I passed the audition!

That wasn’t the question, though, was it? I think Sheldon was asking what, if anything, is your standard for disbelieve generally. If you don’t have such a standard, that’s fine, but it makes any argument regarding your beliefs inherently weak.

Boru

What's yours?

About the highest level of certainty we can have is a scientifically established claims that pass the rigors of critique and repeatable experiments that confirm the hypothesis. Unfortunately not all theories can be so tested. 

The second level is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. It doesn't mean all doubt is erased but reasonable doubt is.

The third level is a simple preponderance of evidence. In the mind of the beholder there is more evidence in favor of one claim than against it. Or there is more evidence that disfavors the claim than for it.

Evidence are facts that make a claim more or less probable.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

That wasn’t the question, though, was it? I think Sheldon was asking what, if anything, is your standard for disbelieve generally. If you don’t have such a standard, that’s fine, but it makes any argument regarding your beliefs inherently weak.

Boru

What's yours?

About the highest level of certainty we can have is a scientifically established claims that pass the rigors of critique and repeatable experiments that confirm the hypothesis. Unfortunately not all theories can be so tested. 

The second level is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. It doesn't mean all doubt is erased but reasonable doubt is.

The third level is a simple preponderance of evidence. In the mind of the beholder there is more evidence in favor of one claim than against it. Or there is more evidence that disfavors the claim than for it.

Evidence are facts that make a claim more or less probable.

If those are your standards, then your belief in a deliberately created universe doesn’t meet them.

Boru

[Drew_2013]

What's yours?

About the highest level of certainty we can have is a scientifically established claims that pass the rigors of critique and repeatable experiments that confirm the hypothesis. Unfortunately not all theories can be so tested. 

The second level is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. It doesn't mean all doubt is erased but reasonable doubt is.

The third level is a simple preponderance of evidence. In the mind of the beholder there is more evidence in favor of one claim than against it. Or there is more evidence that disfavors the claim than for it.

Evidence are facts that make a claim more or less probable.

If those are your standards, then your belief in a deliberately created universe doesn’t meet them.

Boru

It meets the preponderance of evidence meaning more in favor of the existence of a Creator than against.

[Nay_Sayer]

If those are your standards, then your belief in a deliberately created universe doesn’t meet them.

Boru

It meets the preponderance of evidence meaning more in favor of the existence of a Creator than against.

It doesn't. You saying it does and having convinced yourself of it also doesn't it make it so.