I will prove to you that God exists

[Sheldon]

Oh dear, firstly and for the second time it is too much, not to (sic) much, and the idea you know what most, let alone all, atheists think is too stupid a claim to do anything with but point and laugh.

If you think you have evidence the universe was created by a deity using supernatural powers, then present it, but you will need to a lot better than misrepresenting scientific terms like fine tuning, as this scientific term explains only natural physical attributes of the universe. It does not evidence anything supernatural, this is the core error you started with, and haven't the integrity to address. 

The term fine tuning is a metaphor, like the term the big bang, nether are meant literally, and neither idea, nor any established scientific idea, has ever evidenced anything supernatural. The scientific term differs from the theological argument using that term, the apologetics argument from fine tuning, points at the natural physical characteristics of the universe, and then uses an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy, namely "we can't explain X, therefore god did it."

Nothing Drew has presented, goes beyond the use of that fallacy.

This is hardly saying much, since the existence of the natural physical universe, and natural causation, is an objective fact, one might as well deny the rotundity of the earth.

Bullshit. What natural causation caused the universe to exist? 

Is English your first language? Do me a favour and highlight the text in my post, where you imagine I claimed "natural causation caused the universe to exist"?

It wasn't like anything like the natural forces that came into existence since they didn't exist yet. 

I think that may have answered my first question anyway. Can I have that in English please? 

Whether intentionally or the result of mindless natural forces the universe (spacetime matter) began to exist. That's creation. I didn't think I needed to tell you this.

Dishonest semantics, I was obviously responding to your claims for a creator, I didn't think there'd be any need to explain that, but I have always been something of an optimist, it seems it was misplaced here. 

 The scientific term differs from the theological argument using that term, the apologetics argument from fine tuning, points at the natural physical characteristics of the universe, and then uses an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy, namely 

Man, are you grasping at straws. Big bang isn't a metaphor its a catchy name the person who first proposed BB theory and it stuck. It wasn't initially big and it didn't cause a bang since there was no medium for sound to travel through.

Am I being played by a sarcastic genius? The only other alternative is that I am kicking a helpless puppy. 
Be a dear and explain to me what you think the word metaphor means, only this " Big bang isn't a metaphor ..."It wasn't initially big and it didn't cause a bang..." Is once again comedy fucking gold. 
Do you (Drew) accept that the scientific term fine tuning, describes entirely natural characteristics of the physical universe? 

"we can't explain X, therefore god did it."

The contention it was intentionally caused does explain why we live in a universe that caused life to exist.

Wow!, lets try bullet points. 
1. This does not address your use of an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy, at all. 
2. Your claim (god did it) has no explanatory powers whatsoever, obviously, so wtf are you talking about?

The counter explanation is multiverse did it. 

False dichotomy fallacy, I am done explaining why, physician...heal thyself...

 However as I pointed out fine-tuning is indicative of things caused by intent. 

I don't believe your claim, please demonstrate something beyond repetition of your claim, that this is true. 

The term fine tuning is a metaphor, like the term the big bang, nether are meant literally, and neither idea, nor any established scientific idea, has ever evidenced anything supernatural.

Are you ignorant or lying? Fine-tuning isn't a metaphor its a scientific term that describes things that requires several components in specific values and ranges to cause something to happen. 

Please offer a single peer reviewed scientific citation, that the scientific term fine tuning describes anything but natural characteristics of the physical universe? Oh, and Bullwinkle, if you start with the ad hominem I am definitely your huckleberry. Nothing I love more than indulging in vituperation. 

A laptop is

Man made, unlike the universe, so another false equivalence fallacy. Damn it, I explained it to him. Pearls before swine...

You're still in denial as to why so many scientists subscribe to multiverse theory.

Nope, this is a bare faced lie, since I have made no claims, or even mentioned multiverse theory. 

They believe as you do it wasn't intentionally caused so multiverse did it.

Straw man fallacy, I have expressed no such belief. You're consistent, I'll give you that, sadly not in a good way.