Quote:I think the basic fundamentals of proof and evidence are being twisted here. I cannot disprove something that has not been proven. I cannot disprove a god, or Russell's teapot, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or gremlins hiding underneath my bed. I have not, nor has anyone else, observed these entities in a consistent, provable manner. In any case, regardless of what you believe - belief is not dependent upon reasonable and rational thinking, like in your case.
Lets start from the beggining.
An inteligent being may of been behind the start of the universe or it was natural. It was either God or something natural. This alone gives the existence of God more probability than FSM.
An inteligent being ma of fine tuned this universe and this Earth, it was either God or something natural.
I think these two things alone makes the idea and concept of God much more credible than something imaginary.
Quote:Why do you need faith if you already have evidence? Faith is there to bridge the gaps from what we think we know and what we want to be true.
Well the evidence isnt empirical, its a start. Since no one can claim God exisits or not. I believe the probability of God's existence is more likely than His probability of being something religion created.
Quote:Something tells me that if you had such compelling evidence for god and Jesus existing (which it's not looking likely at all by the way that he did - and if you use biblical literature you won't be saying anything new) you wouldn't need to go find your so-called evidence... and we wouldn't even be having this conversation!
I need to do more research. Our philosophical ideas also determine how interpret evidence which isnt empirical.
Quote:The fact that this planet is just right for us isn't evidence for a supreme creator. The universe provides a multitude of planetary permutations, so quite frankly, if life did not happen on this planet, it would have happened somewhere else.
I think the idea of aliens and other lifeforms is incrediable and would be wonderful. However, we have found no lifeforms on other planets, so I would becareful. Fine tunning arguement would not be refuted if we did find aliens on another planet...
Quote:This is your idea of a refutation?
Im not physicists. So why would I attempt to refute something, I have no idea about?
Perhaps George Lucas was wrong, 'A long time ago, in a far away universes.'
I thought multiveres doesnt equal universes where anything is possible, only things which are naturally possible. Unfortuantely, I dont think the force is naturally possible...
Quote:Don't forget too that we evolved to suit the conditions, not the other way around.
What started life on this planet?
The more we learn about the cell, the more complicated it gets (The cell appears to be designed). Are we going to find a natural explanation for something which is unnatural?
Quote:You supposedly have evidence, yet refuse to present any, so all you really have is one broad assertion after another for the Fine-tuned Universe argument. So why then did your god concept finely tune most of the universe to be hostile to most life-forms? That also includes many environments on this small planet as well.
Why not?
The fine tuning arguements also argues that the universe appears to be fine tuned. If the big bang was a little bit bigger or a little smaller, we wouldnt a have a universe. elements wouldnt exisit, thus stars planets and other celestial bodies.
