I will prove to you that God exists

[Sheldon]

@Sheldon Now Drew, do behave, all anyone need do is read this thread to know your arguments have been relentlessly irrational, do you really still imagine you can bluff your way past this? You have used more logical fallacies in this very post...

Bullshit. Because you say so?

Another rather pointless lie, You used several logical fallacies in that post, and have done so throughout your spiel, all anyone need do is read them to know this is a fact. 

Its objective inferential evidence the universe was intentionally caused to exist. 

Drawing a personal inference is by definition subjective, you clown, and though the conclusion can also be objective this one demonstrably is not, it is just a subjective religious belief you choose to hold. It is unsupported by any objective evidence, as we have seen, it has no explanatory powers whatsoever. One could change deity in your claims to the wizard of Oz, and your belief, and arguments, would lose nothing. 

The existence of the universe makes their claim more probable than if it didn't exist.

The natural is always going to have a higher probability as an explanation in any scenario, than the supernatural, as the former exists as an objective fact, and the we have no objective evidence the latter is possible, nor that any deity is possible, why you think you can keep ignoring that fact is unclear? Just because your Christian indoctrination has left you desperate to cling to deism, is not a sound or objective argument. 

Scientists have extracted numerous formulas and equations from the universe you claim was caused by non-god forces.

I have never claimed this, as I keep telling you, this is a straw man fallacy you keep invoking, now scroll up and look where you called the assertion your claims are irrational "bullshit". Dear oh dear Drew, you're stepping on your dick with each post man. 

Scientists have been successful in reverse engineering the universe.

Nothing explained in science evidences anything but natural phenomena. However as i asked before, and you ignored obviously, please cite any peer reviewed research that evidences anything supernatural? It's almost time for me to stop explaining this now, and start using the "liar liar pants on fire" response your lies deserve Drew. 

You deny a myriad of conditions had to occur for there to be a congenial planet like earth to exist? 

Have, not had, get the tense right. The probability of an event that has already occurred is 1, this was already explained to you. 

natural forces that didn't intend or want our existence have no requirements for any of these conditions to exist. Natural forces don't care if oxygen exists, don't care if planets exist, don't care if water exists. They don't care if life exists.

So what? A coin doesn't care whether heads or tails comes up, nor any of the natural forces, and random event of tossing it into the air, but yet it can and does happen. 

If this universe had to come out as it did

We don't know it had to do this, @Angrboda has patiently been trying to help you understand that this is an unevidenced assumption on your part. 

I respond to as many posts as I can. Right now I have 32 waiting...I only ignore the stupid ones to save time.

Ah I see, this explains your reluctance to re-read your own then, and why you keep repeating the same mendacious and fallacious claims. 

the universe might have been forced to come out as it did with all the conditions and properties for life to exist. How does that look any different than being intentionally caused to exist to have all the properties for life to exist? 

Obviously for the difference between might have (or might not have, they're semantically the same) is that the assertion is supported by sufficient, and sufficiently objective evidence. You, as we know, have none for your subjective religious belief. Your arguments are fallacious, and your claims subjective. 

Does it matter?  Answer the question and I'll tell you what it is analogous to.

Drew: Yes it does...now buzz off.

Oh Drew, you are priceless. 

I'm not invoking any specific explanation.  I'm pointing out that we simply don't know one way or another whether the characteristics could be other than what they are. 


Dre: Which makes it a moot point 

If you cannot demonstrate that the characteristics of this universe could have turned out differently than they are, then your subjective unevidenced assertion they are too improbable to have happened without design is killed stone dead, this question exposes how poorly reasoned your argument is, well it's not your argument obviously, just one you're plagiarising to cling to the wreckage of your Christian indoctrination. Free yourself man, learn to be rational, to think critically, you'll thank us afterward. 

In science, "fine-tuning" refers to the idea that certain fundamental constants and initial conditions of the universe are incredibly precisely set for life to exist. 

No that's not accurate, it's only true for the type of organic carbon based life we know of. Can you demonstrate other types of life, even non carbon based life, could not have emerged? You see like your inability to demonstrate that those natural characteristics of the universe cannot have emerged differently, in a different type of universe, this rather destroys your subjective religious claim it all had to be designed. 

Do you think scientists who stake their reputation on the claim we live in a multiverse never considered your brilliant objection that for some unknown reason the universe had to come out as it did and that way was to allow life?

Nothing in science evidence any deity, or anything supernatural, that's a demonstrable fact. Turn on any global news network if you don't believe me. 

 It is a key premise of the argument from fine tuning that they could be or had to be tuned. 

drew: No, the key argument is that they are tuned for life to exist. It makes not a slightest difference if they had to be that way. 

Au contraire mon ami, if they had to be that way, why would they have to be designed at all? there is also no objective or scientific evidence they were fine tuned by a creator for life, that is a subjective religious belief you're adding to the science. 

how does it look any different than a circuit board deliberately designed to fine tolerances?

One more time for Drew then, you are invoking a false equivalence fallacy.  Just because any two things share a common similarity, does not mean they are the same. The key difference that expose your claim as a fallacy, is that we have overwhelming objective evidence circuit boards are designed and created, we have none for universes. 

The main issue is scientists tell us the universe is fine-tuned for life. 

If they do, then they are offering a subjective belief, as are you, not a scientific fact. In science, the term fine tuning, as we all now know, describes certain characteristics of the natural material universe, and how vanishingly narrow they had to be for the type of organic life we observe on earth to emerge at all. 
It does not assert, nor does it evidence at all, that the universe was fine tuned, or designed, or created, that is a subjective religious belief creationist like you, add on. Perhaps you think if you repeat the lie enough times, we will stop noticing? In science fine tuned is a metaphor, like the big bang, it is not a literal description. 

[b]The Grand Nudger [/b]Either assumption is deleterious to the Idiot god. If they couldn't be otherwise and still yield what god wants then god's wishes and desires are beholden to an entirely natural reality.

@Drew_2013, pay attention, that is how you draw a sound logical inference.