A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style.

[Im_Ryan]

Fine-tuning you say?

I just had a debate on this over this article. I'm sure my reply for that will fit in here:

My thoughts on the article:
I have to admit, the Christians jumped on the science bandwagon faster than I thought, but I knew this would happen eventually. The article you sent me is not news, it's an opinionated blog. First statement is:
"Opinion by Leslie A. Wickman, special to CNN"

This argument is nothing new. It's called the "Anthropic Principle". This is the original argument I mentioned that the "Fine-tuning" argument comes from. My rebuttles are the same.
There is literally a list of things wrong in that article, but I'll just mention the highlights:
1. Let's look at the logic that is used here:
"The universe has a beginning" ->
"Everything that began has to have a cause" ->
"Since the universe began, it must have a cause" ->
"therefore, god created the universe"
See the problem? Besides the "Watchmaker fallacy" and "Begging the question", let's just say it's right (it's not for facetious logic I just stated). How do you come to the conclusion that YOUR god created the universe? Every religion claims that their god created the universe. So, who's to say it wasn't Onyame? Allah? Zues? The Flying Spaghetti Monster?
2. No one knows who wrote genesis. Apologetics claim it's just poetry, while fundamentalists claim it as truth. Well, it is FACT that it CANNOT be true. It goes against science (besides also contradicting itself [Genesis 1 vs Genesis 2]), so if you take it as poetry, then you can not, in all honesty, cherry pick scriptures and present them as proof. Doesn't work that way.
3. If God created the universe for us, then why is (literally) over 99% of it deadly to humans? If he created it just for us, why did he make it so big? It's unnecessary. One must draw the conclusion that God is trolling us or is just not very good at what he does.
Now, if you replace god with chance, then everything makes sense. Since we are an infinitely small piece of the universe, it makes perfect sense that everything was NOT made for us, rather, we were "made" for it [only earth at that, which over 90% is still uninhabitable by humans].
4. Confirmation bias. You start with the solution and work backwards to the question. For example: "I believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Since all planets are shaped like meatballs, he must exist. Also, since you can't disprove he didn't create the universe, he must have. Therefore, he is the only true religion."
Same thing applies here, but with Jesus and the new scientific discovery. It essentially boils down to "You can't prove me wrong, therefore I'm right." Try pulling that in court...
----
If you'd like more examples, I'd have no problem to keep going.