Search results

Penrose has never published any scientific paper supporting the statement that 'the universe is incredibly fine tuned'. Nor has anyone else. So in fact you have presented no such thing. So what. The earth appears flat.

....merely begs the question, if the universe needed a tuner, who or what is needed to tune the tuner.

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/paul_draper/no-design.html "Robin Collins offers three design arguments, one appealing to the existence of intelligent life and the fine-tuning upon which that life depends, one appealing to the beauty of the laws of physics, and one appealing to the...

Just trying to help achwillees. You were talking about honoring the greatest mass murderers and left the biggest one out. Unless of course "He" isn't actually real like the others you mentioned.

Camel's toe so not allowed.

Then you made a stretch drawing that parallel between humanity's evil and God's wrath. That same deity is said to have made Stalin and Mao in its image. If you don't mind asking, are you in fact trying to build a cast iron case FOR honoring great mass murderers?

I'd say you pretty much answered your own question as to what people of a certain persuation do - right there.

Then don't forget to celebrate worst of all, God.... who f'kn killed everyone.

It is the universe which is not hospitable to life not 'space'. If the universe is going to be described as finely tuned, then although life is possible, it is finely tuned to be lethal towards it and everything else. Including itself. Your trouble is you can't follow through. The only...

LOL. You're such a loser.. Can't address the substance and can't handle what's actually being said, so you troll out the same old debunked vids and pretend they can mean something they don't and can't . Science just doesn't give any support for your magic man maker no matter how many silly...

The universe is clearly not set up for life. If it were set up at all, then it was set up to be empty. Most of it is empty space lethal to life. Chemical reaction and environmental circumstances set up conditions for life to arise, not the universe. As for your 'who' question...

...a chemical one!

You're saying life from non life didn't or is highly unlikely to happen by chance. So chemical reaction and environment make it not by chance - but inevitable - then. Where's your problem exactly?

All of which run the gamut of atheism. :)

Why does life from non-life need to be able to reproduce at the same time? Can you also remember how the rest of the creationist irrationality goes on that?

I suggest it's fair to say human belief systems that can't be fully described in simple terms of logic, are generally found to be illogical, incoherent or inconsistent. Religious belief systems are often all three. Not described in simple terms perhaps, yes, as human feelings expressed in the...

There is only science to answer and explain in practical ways how life came to exist and evolve. So far it's all chemical and remains so. Anything else, well, just isn't science.

... is a 100% certainty claim? I don't think so.

Agnosticism is a self-contradicting, self-defeating religious statement and a cop out. Agnosticism says it is known that knowledge of a God cannot be known. :confused: Atheism is perhaps more honest in saying there is no good reason to even consider trying to know about something that by...