Theists: What is the most compelling argument you have heard for Atheism?

[Jesster]

[RoadRunner79]

[Jackie]

[Jesster]

What does any of that have to do with fine-tuning? The vast majority of the universe is unsuitable for any form of life, so the assumption at the end there is definitively missing the mark.

[Jackie]

What does any of that have to do with fine-tuning? The vast majority of the universe is unsuitable for any form of life, so the assumption at the end there is definitively missing the mark.

Don't ask me, ask a theist who buys into fine tuning. I know it is a crappy argument.

[Jesster]

What does any of that have to do with fine-tuning? The vast majority of the universe is unsuitable for any form of life, so the assumption at the end there is definitively missing the mark.

Don't ask me, ask a theist who buys into fine tuning. I know it is a crappy argument.

I was asking RoadRunner

[Jackie]

When one postulates a perfect God and an "all powerful God" the logic fails compared to what we see, both with the universe and evolution. We are a result of the universe and atoms make up any mass in the universe as well as life, so you cannot separate "fine tuning" between life on earth and the universe. 

I mentioned factories as an analogy. Theists cannot escape that they are treating all this as a product, as if life and the universe were a product manufactured by a factory owner.

Problem is, just with the universe, most of it is empty space, and most of the universe is hostile to life, so that alone would seem lots of waste of material just to put all that here for us. 

And since we live in this universe, life as well if looked at as a product, like the universe, this too in the context of evolution, also seems to be a lot of waste.

I used the millions of sperm to one egg analogy, and even most female eggs go to period and do nothing. Imagine how quickly a car company would go out of business if the owner suddenly decided to use 1 ton of sheet metal to make one car. Humans who believe in any type of cosmic factory product maker, fail to take into account, both with the universe, and life on earth, efficiency and output vs material going in. Successful factories in real life maximize efficiency and waste as little material as possible in the input output process. 

If they still want to claim a God, it cannot be called perfect and 100% input to 100% output with no error . Otherwise it cannot be called perfect or all powerful. If you still want to call it that, then this factory boss is merely using us for it's amusement like we are lab rats or toys. I cannot buy the idea of being the product or property of a super hero. It is a vile concept to me to think of myself as having no input other than responding to bribes or grovel to the threats of the factory boss.

[Jackie]

How about you consider that your naked assertion is merely a reflection of your own human qualities?...

Xenophanes "But if cattle and horses and lions had hands
or could paint with their hands and create works such as men do,
horses like horses and cattle like cattle
also would depict the gods' shapes and make their bodies
of such a sort as the form they themselves have.

You better stop before you beclown yourself any more, Brian. You're so ignorant that you apparently don't even know that Xenophanes was a monotheist and the above quote is a critique of ancient Greek polytheism. Idiot.

You assume I didn't know that. He's right about that analogy but again, being right about that would still not make his god real either. Otherwise since Arabs invented algebra, by that logic Allah must be the one true God. I was agreeing with his analogy, not any god claim he had.

My mom was Catholic, so by your logic, since I loved her, and knew her for 44 years, and since she got some things right, like teaching for 30 years, that must mean eating a magic cracker will save one's soul? Sam Harris is a neurologist, so by your logic, since he is into Buddhism, better convert to Buddhism. 

I don't care he was a monotheist, other smart people in history come from all sorts of religions and? Again being right about some things, does not prove any god to be real. 

You look at the world's religious artwork, funny how the spirits/deities/gods/prophets depicted reflect the societies they are created in. That is the same thing he meant. You look at depictions of Jesus in Italy he is more depicted in their history as having Italian features. Look at depictions of Jesus in Mexico or South America and they tend to reflect Latino/Hispanic features. Look at how the gods of the Hindus in India are depicted and funny that, seem to have the features of those born in India.Look at Native American spirits and their features reflect Native Americans history.

 None of my argument was proving a monotheistic god or polytheistic god by quoting him.

[Fake Messiah]

[downbeatplumb]

[quote='downbeatplumb' pid='1531984' dateline='1490808256']
How is this god person supposed to set the physics?
what process did it use,?did it punch them into its celestial computer or are the theists just assuming that if no one knows, god did it is the default?

god is not the answer to how god is not the answer to anything as far as I can tell.

This isn't a God of the gaps type of argument.  (I'm starting to think that many don't understand, and do not address what is being said).

There is a gap in our knowledge and you have filled it with god. How is this not a god of the gaps argument.

What the fine tuning argument is saying; is that the evidence shows that something capable of choice and direction is responsible for what is being seen.  It also makes the notion that there is no purpose or intention behind what we see as difficult.

No it doesn't, what it says is that these are what is seen as the physics needed for life. It has nothing to say on how the physics came to be like that. This is classic god of the gaps.

"just assuming that if no one knows, god did it is the default" is a strawman, whether from ignorance, or it is intentional.

What I said is not a strawman but a factual description of what you said.