Dear Resident Theists

[ignoramus]

The way we are today, with the way the universe is today, with the way our laws of physics are, "IS" the only way we can be here!
It's not fine tuning! It's the only solution! We wouldn't be here discussing anything if our reality WASN'T "fine tuned", so to speak.

If there is a way, nature will blindly find it...

[Napoléon]

I will get in to the fine tuning in a little bit, but I'm sure you are aware that leading scientists, including Professor Hawking, talk about the appearance of precision, design and fine-tuning with the cosmological constant and so on.  

Are you really trying to appeal to Stephen Hawking's authority here? As though he supports your assertion about fine-tuning, or in any way even vaguely suggests that the universe was 'designed'? His works, and many of his musings, repeatedly talk about how no god is required and go against completely your own assertions. The conclusions you make from the universe are poles apart from his. Just read any of his books.

Yes, I'm perfectly aware of what scientists like Stephen Hawking say on the topic of the universe being designed, doesn't appear that you are however. It's very disingenuous to namedrop someone like Hawking as though he would in any way endorse your own views.

[Kingpin]

I will get in to the fine tuning in a little bit, but I'm sure you are aware that leading scientists, including Professor Hawking, talk about the appearance of precision, design and fine-tuning with the cosmological constant and so on.  

Are you really trying to appeal to Stephen Hawking's authority here? As though he supports your assertion about fine-tuning, or in any way even vaguely suggests that the universe was 'designed'? His works, and many of his musings, repeatedly talk about how no god is required and go against completely your own assertions. The conclusions you make from the universe are poles apart from his. Just read any of his books.

Yes, I'm perfectly aware of what scientists like Stephen Hawking say on the topic of the universe being designed, doesn't appear that you are however. It's very disingenuous to namedrop someone like Hawking as though he would in any way endorse your own views.

Not at all Napoleon.  I'm quite aware that Hawking's conclusion and my own are polar opposites.  I merely mentioned that even scientific leaders such as Hawking lend credence to the immense design and, precision and fine-tuning of the universe.  He reaches a different conclusion than I do.

[Kingpin]

I will get in to the fine tuning in a little bit, but I'm sure you are aware that leading scientists, including Professor Hawking, talk about the appearance of precision, design and fine-tuning with the cosmological constant and so on.  That any marginal difference in certain parameters and the universe would not exist as we know it.

Exactly! What kind of a designer creates something a hair away from a catastrophe? Who builds a house inches away from a steep gorge?

But how is that different from any piece of precision engineering?  Any mechanical engineer will tell you that in designing something there are small margins of error and if something falls outside of that margin it may cause the entire piece to non-function.  Would you want the engineers of your car to be more loose with their precision in designing it?  An electrical engineer is even more rigid and that it MUST be these precise calculations or it won't work at all, if a voltage is a little too high, it could be a fire.  That to me is why the precision and margin of error being so small in the universe's properties shows intelligent design.

[Kingpin]

Thank you for improving my analogy and then failing utterly to see how it obliterates your original contention even more decisively.

How so exactly?

[Longhorn]

So you're saying an omnipotent being can't do a better job than human engineers?

[Kingpin]

So you're saying an omnipotent being can't do a better job than human engineers?

Not at all, only that we can see immense precision and design and out of that can reasonably posit an intelligent mind behind it.

[GrandizerII]

lkingpinl

Are you really trying to appeal to Stephen Hawking's authority here? As though he supports your assertion about fine-tuning, or in any way even vaguely suggests that the universe was 'designed'? His works, and many of his musings, repeatedly talk about how no god is required and go against completely your own assertions. The conclusions you make from the universe are poles apart from his. Just read any of his books.

Yes, I'm perfectly aware of what scientists like Stephen Hawking say on the topic of the universe being designed, doesn't appear that you are however. It's very disingenuous to namedrop someone like Hawking as though he would in any way endorse your own views.

Not at all Napoleon.  I'm quite aware that Hawking's conclusion and my own are polar opposites.  I merely mentioned that even scientific leaders such as Hawking lend credence to the immense design and, precision and fine-tuning of the universe.  He reaches a different conclusion than I do.

Key word is "appear". It's meant to be rhetorical whereby a difficulty is acknowledged but then a naturalistic solution/explanation is provided. Sort of like how Darwin acknowledged the complexity of the eye.

The universe is not, objectively speaking, finely-tuned for life. We're just conditioned to see it that way since we ourselves experience life and we like to focus on ourselves and the immediate surroundings. But what we often ignore is that the majority of the universe doesn't seem to be filled with any form of life.

[Kingpin]

Key word is "appear". It's meant to be rhetorical whereby a difficulty is acknowledged but then a naturalistic solution/explanation is provided. Sort of like how Darwin acknowledged the complexity of the eye.

The universe is not, objectively speaking, finely-tuned for life. We're just conditioned to see it that way since we ourselves experience life and we like to focus on ourselves and the immediate surroundings. But what we often ignore is that the majority of the universe doesn't seem to be filled with life.

And do you agree with his naturalistic explanation of "That because there is a law of gravity the Universe can and will create itself" and "That in the singularity the laws of nature necessarily breakdown"?

The laws of mathematics say that 1+1=2, but the laws have never produced a single dollar, and if the laws of nature or broken down in the singularity, then the naturalistic starting point is also supernatural.

[Homeless Nutter]

Not at all, only that we can see immense precision and design and out of that can reasonably posit an intelligent mind behind it.

Except human engineers have to adapt to pre-existing conditions, like laws of nature and available resources.
What sorts of constrictions does your - allegedly omnipotent - god face? Are you saying that if god was to make an electronic device - he would also have to follow the instructions? Well, then - in that case miracles are impossible and god is not supernatural.
Or there's another - more powerful - being/event that sets the rules for your god. Either way - he's not omnipotent.