Let's say that science proves that God exists

[Esquilax]

I'll let the fact they fall within such a narrow range that would allow life to speak for itself without reference to whether they could be otherwise. I think your counter argument only persuades people who like yourself are totally convinced God doesn't exist.

You keep talking about narrow ranges, but that's not exactly right, now is it? I mean, we're working on a pretty limited scale here, aren't we? All you can say with any degree of intellectually honesty is that things fall within a narrow range for life as we understand it. But that doesn't mean that, if the circumstances were different, that life couldn't have arisen in some other way that we simply- through mistake or lack of knowledge- couldn't have imagined.

The debate about theism and atheism isn't a one way street as most atheists characterize it, that the so called burden of evidence rests with theists only. Atheists make a claim also, that the universe and our existence all occurred minus any plan or design. That the conditions that allowed our existence occurred was not by plan, but by fortuitous happenstance.

Noooooooooo...

Seriously, stop telling us what we believe, it's obnoxious. Once again, for the sake of honesty, I can't speak for everyone else here, but my worldview doesn't preclude a god entirely, but it does demand that I not believe anything without evidence, and that you and yours haven't provided sufficient evidence for yours. Given this, I'm hardly making a claim, am I?

Besides, who's saying that a possible designer needs to be a god? Or that there needs to be a designer or randomness? You can't say with any more certainty than I can, and yet you're advocating a position, whereas I am not. Nor is any atheist really, beyond that you haven't been able to prove your designer at all.

So... you know, stop telling us what's in our heads, okay?

Of course you'll object and say it wasn't by chance it was because the laws of physics produced the result we observe but according to atheists the laws of physics weren't engineered or designed to be as they are either.

Actually, there's also this: so what if it was all by chance? And who cares how small you think the chances would be? The chances could be .01 percent with a thousand zeroes before it and there'd still be a chance it would happen, so long as it isn't an utter zero. To be very simple, it has happened, too; on a long enough timescale, everything does, if it has a chance of happening. And in our case, the thing in question only needs to happen once.

What does the slim chance of a thing prove, beyond that the chances of the thing happening are slim? How does this point toward your designer at all?

Except for the unaccountable fact they happen to be within extremely fine tolerance for planets, stars and life to exist. People can weigh that fact for themselves and decide if that is evidence of design or whether they think your objections hold water.

Except that small chances are not evidence of design at all. You're imposing some additional mystery onto the situation without any form of evidence, and that additional thing has no explanatory power of its own, it just raises further questions.

I am putting forth a fact (not theory not speculation) that the constant G (among several others) falls in an incredibly narrow range for life to exist or even for the stars and planets to exist. I haven't rejected the notion it could be other wise or accepted the notion it had to be as it is as neither of those possibilites are a fact. If the're not fact they don't exist. Your only counter is we don't know if they had to be as they are or whether there values came by happenstance. In other words your counter argument is a plea to ignorance.

Are you being serious? How is that a plea to ignorance? We genuinely don't know if these constants could be different. The only significant divergence between your viewpoint here and ours is that where we admit our ignorance and suggest that we continue research, you're simply assuming they could never change, and then making a number of other assumptions to reach your desired conclusion, regardless of the accuracy of any point of your argument.

Now, which of us is appealing to ignorance again?

Thats your line of bullshit. If you don't believe the universe was designed and engineered then you believe it came about by happenstance. The crap atheism is just no belief in god is just a debating tactic.

Wow, false dichotomy much?