Big Bang Theory

[Kirbmarc]

You've gone from superficial responses to inane responses. Try to defend one. Pick one. You choose. They're all stupid - and irrelevant.

So this is your method. When people disprove your arguments you declare their answers stupid and irrelevant. How logical.

Just for kicks, then, let me be clear: Fine Tuning is a fallacy, because it assumes that the universe is made for life, when what is true is that life adapted to this universe. Saying that the universe is fine-tuned for life is just like saying that noses are fine-tuned for glasses.

There is a staggering amount of evidence that life has been fine-tuned through NATURAL SELECTION to adapt to the physical and geophysical environment in which life exists. Life has adapted to physics, not vice-versa.

Moreover, if the Universe were really designed to be fine-tuned for life, it should be the best one possible, but evidence suggests that it is not. In fact, most of the Universe is highly hostile to life.

But I know that no matter what I write, no matter how I show you that your arguments are wrong, you will just repeat that you are right, because my answers are "inane". If Stephen Hawking or Richard Dawkins would come to the forum and write detailed dissertations on the reason about how and why you are wrong, you'd still reply that their answers are "inane".

Your arguments are old and "inane". They're the proofs of Thomas Aquinas, and they've been disproved countless times. A self-proclaimed owner of an Encyclopedia of Philosophy should know that.