The Ownership of Science

[Neo-Scholastic]

Yes. The mis-use of science. This is where we are going to get into interpretations again.

Not really, but if we have to argue What Is Words And How Do They Do!?! from the outset, your objections are almost certainly going to be inane.

Here’s an example:
The universe exists and the Big Bang happened.

An atheist says : I don’t know why it exists. It just is.
An agnostic atheist, let’s take the scientist Michio Kaku for example, will philosophize and says : There’s a multiverse that exists which creates new universes and Big Bangs randomly.
A theist will say: God created this universe because it’s fine-tuned for life.

Who is mis-using science here?

Pretty simple, and simply inane.  The universe isn't fine tuned for life.  You're a puddle of water marveling at how perfectly the hole was made for you. Your hypothetical theist is wrong on the facts - and spouting speudoscientific claptrap, instead.

All I see are 3 opinions about generally accepts facts. Why is fine-tuning not a viable hypothesis? What exactly is your objection other than incredulity?