(July 16, 2015 at 9:40 am)lkingpinl Wrote: 1. The extreme fine-tuning of the universe in order for the possibility of human life in relation to the astronomically calculated odds of this happening by chance.
The fine-tuning argument must either assume that the possible 'settings' for life are limited and immutable --implying that god is similarly limited, which puts the idea that he created everything in doubt-- or that god can create any sort of universe and make it support life... in which case fine-tuning is bunk because any settings could support life if god wished it so. So it's really a non-argument.
The fine-tuning argument has had its flaws exposed, time and time and time again.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
-Stephen Jay Gould
