Does anyone actually believe in God or are they just afraid...

jem said:
2. "it may be that that number is simply zero, and it's zero for some fundamental reason that we will discover. And so it isn't fine tuned. "

This is or is similar to the hope for the Grand Unifying theory or the Theory of Everything. This is one of the options Susskind discusses in his video. Note... the GUT does not really discount a Creator at all.
More...

Are you suggesting now that any value must be fine tuned , including zero, and an ever so very slightly non zero also - as if nature is incapable of falling into any value by itself.

jem said:
3. Here is the other option.... multiverse. Note... as I have proven to you before... whether you have one universe with regions with different fundamental laws or multiple universes its the same thing... other almost infinite tries to make a universe as fine tuned as ours for life.
More...

You've proven nothing other than how much you're relying on mentioning multiverse to prop up your deity.
You've previously called me liar for even suggesting constants in regions of this universe could vary, now you're acknowledging it. I suppose that’s progress for you, of sorts.
With infinite variations possible in the laws of nature, any kind of universe is possible. The need or question for a supernatural agency rendered pointless.
 
Multiverse is scientifically falsifiable in principle.
God isn't.
A falsifiable God would immediately become something, like gravity or quantum fluctuation, in line with the physical laws of the Universe.
 
piezoe said:
Well it isn't bad science as of now. The Christian concept of a creator is verifiable but not falsifiable. The concept of a multiverse is verifiable, but we don't know yet whether the universe has limits, therefore we don't know whether the concept is falsifiable. Science requires falsifiability.
More...
Wrong piehole. Nobody knows if the concept of a creator is ultimately falsifiable or not.

When you talk about things you don't understand, you make a fool of yourself -- like STUpid did with this load of nonsensical STUpidity: :D

A Celestial Teapot or a Celestial God? Of course both are equally implausible.
Simply because a Celestial God is just as much of an unfalsifiable claim as is a Celestial Teapot.
 
stu said:
Multiverse is scientifically falsifiable in principle.
God isn't.
A falsifiable God would immediately become something, like gravity or quantum fluctuation, in line with the physical laws of the Universe.
More...
You have no idea what you're talking about.
 
Whatever.
Post less and spend more time looking for your 'plausible celestial teapot'.:D
That sure must've gotten under your skin :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top