Video| Fine Tuning from the Top Scientists

Quote from Ricter:

Long thread, has anyone figured out yet how many fine-tuners can dance on top of a piano key?

Ahem.
stu can't be honest so it's really just an insult fest.
I could rip him to shreds but so far I haven't decided to waste the time.

So what does the communist moron(that would be you ricter since marx was your avatar) have to say about the existence of God?
 
Quote from Ricter:

Long thread, has anyone figured out yet how many fine-tuners can dance on top of a piano key?

Ahem.
...with a piano key that can and will create itself from nothing.... it's not necessary to summon any fine tuners, dancing or otherwise .
 
Quote from stu:

...with a piano key that can and will create itself from nothing.... it's not necessary to summon any fine tuners, dancing or otherwise .
Lol.

But... how come fine-tuners can't create themselves from nothing, too? : )
 
Quote from Ricter:

Lol.

But... how come fine-tuners can't create themselves from nothing, too? : )
Because Ricter I'd say, it's really all too clear how imaginary abstract make-believe concepts like fine tuners, unnecessary to a piano key, need a piano key to create themselves in.
 
Quote from stu:

Because Ricter I'd say, it's really all too clear how imaginary abstract make-believe concepts like fine tuners, unnecessary to a piano key, need a piano key to create themselves in.
Hmm, I see. So is this the origin of "string" theory?
 
very nice ricter.

an illusion

the conjectured 5th through 10th compactified unproven strings which create almost universes.
 
what complete utter horseshit.
you have become an embarrassment to your greifer troll friends.
you have run out of brain power and now you resort to lies and fake straw men.


1. No one has ever stated physicists prove God's existence.

You have turned into a complete liar.

2. I just proved to you Hawkings statement is conditioned on the multiverse.

If it were not, you still have the fine tuning problem.

(not to mention I have given you the quotes from this paper dozens of times.)

3. What juvenile shit to propose. Is this some new jury instruction.

Speculator in uno, Speculator in omnibus.

Scientists are allowed to speculate.
Its frauds like you pretend Hawkings speculations are fact which is the problem on this thread.





Quote from stu:

"Physicists Prove God Existence"
You'd think, if you thought at all, just the title alone would raise some serious alarm bells in the -what an obvious utter load of bollocks- department.



I can see you have learned nothing.

I've never said "random chance is what created the universe". It's inevitable consequence. The best you can hope is that you have a very severe form of dyslexia. More likely, you just can't help lying about stuff.


False. My remarks are not out of context or fraudulent and Hawking's statement is not conditioned on the multiverse. However much in denial you are of your own links which state not multiverse, may I suggest you first stop lying. It really won't help you.


That just goes to show how embarrassingly little you understand about what Hawking says or means. The thing that obviously creates your universe is a perpetual sheer willful ignorance about what is being said.


According to what you dreamed up above, it would be "incredibly tuned" ....by gravity. You keep crashing your own silly nonsense. Why?

You've declared what Susskind says is speculation.
So then, by your standard, what he says about fine tuning is also speculation.
So anything he says about god , which of course does not have any science, math, laws of physics to support it , is going to be worse than speculation.

You destroyed your ridiculous assertion with your own false appeal to authority. Do you really like being that unintelligent?
  • ".... the universe can and will create itself from nothing.... It is not necessary to invoke God.."
Direct and in straight forward plain English, from what you have declared to be your authority.
Your: "a great minds of science" authority.
Your: "There is nothing wrong with scientific speculation." authority.

Apart from the absurd claims you make, trying to invoke god against your own authority, is never going to make it look like you have the least kind of a clue.
 
until you present something with substance.
This is going to be my response.

Quote from jem:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/z4E_bT4ecgk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
Quote from jem:
what complete utter horseshit.
you have become an embarrassment to your greifer troll friends.
you have run out of brain power and now you resort to lies and fake straw men.

1. No one has ever stated physicists prove God's existence.
"Physicists Prove God Existence"
1. It is stated in the title of the vid you puked up time after time.

You really don't even read, let alone understand what you post.

Quote from jem:

2. I just proved to you Hawkings statement is conditioned on the multiverse.
No you didn't. You have proved you delude yourself into believing you have . Different thing altogether.
Your own link states...."without invoking the existence of the Multiverse."
READ YOUR OWN LINKS you idiot.

Quote from jem:

3. What juvenile shit to propose. Is this some new jury instruction.

Speculator in uno, Speculator in omnibus.

Scientists are allowed to speculate.
Its frauds like you pretend Hawkings speculations are fact which is the problem on this thread.

You say they are speculating.
You can't have him or Susskind or any other of the scientists you try drag in as an authority in ANY way, other than one that is speculating.
They don't support your claim for or against your "Tuner" because, you have stated, they are only speculating.
That's a non-argument you have there.

You're really not up to this. You can't even understand the basic fundamental flaming obvious when it's in your face.
 
Back
Top