Theists: What is the most compelling argument you have heard for Atheism?

[Angrboda]

What is not a fact is that the universal constants could have been different. You have only arbitrarily asserted physical necessity is not the reason for the fine-tuning of the universe, not ruled it out by any rational process. I'm sure there's a Nobel waiting for the person who can do that.

Not to mention that there's no mechanism for universe generation that would not just keep spewing them out, so there's no way to rule out chance from near infinite opportunities, either.

2. fails spectacularly.

---

For the love of reason, you can't be this dense. You haven't given a reason why design is more probable than necessity or chance. Without that, it's 2 to one against.

First, you have obviously not read back through the posts for the past 9 pages. 

Yes, the initial constants could have been different. There is nothing that makes them the way they are. That is not debated. Therefore, the universe is NOT the way it is out of necessity.

This is flat out wrong.

The desire to explain the constants has been one of the driving forces behind efforts to develop a complete unified description of nature, or theory of everything. Physicists have hoped that such a theory would show that each of the constants of nature could have only one logically possible value.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...s-2006-02/

The only place that you've ruled out necessity is in your fevered imagination. A corollary of this fact is that any calculation of how improbable the current physical constants are is based on nothing but hot air. Nobody knows the ranges these values can take, nor even if they can take other values. Your statements here are nothing but fancy lies.