>Atheists must believe in a multi-universe in order to discount the evidence of intelligent design in nature
>The lack of evidence of God is enough to negate a reasonable belief him, but the lack of evidence for a multi-verse is sufficient for belief in such.
>mfw atheists rely on faith as much as theists do.
must believe in a multi-universe in order to discount the evidence of intelligent design in nature
multiverse theory has nothing to do with intelligent design, our current univserse is largely inhospitable to life aside from Earth
>multiverse theory has nothing to do with intelligent design
In order to account for the fine tuning that is found within Stars that enables them to create elements or in the fine tuning found in the human cell, the extreme rarity for all these, it is not sufficient to say all of these things happened to occur by random chance UNLESS they employ the mult-verse theory, which states that if there were an infinite number of universes withh different laws, one is inevitably bound to encompass what was needed for life in our universe.
Infinite universes = enough possibility for randomness to create the necessary conditions of life.
>he has faith in le scientists
no it isnt.
i love that theists primary method of argument has become to make a fake version of atheists arguments thats fucking stupid. Because the actual arguments atheists make are too hard to argue against.
atheists employing the multiverse argument is the only way they can write off intelligent design, do you have an argument or just cope?
See
>survivorship bias
doesn't account for how "randomness" is incapable of providing countless goldy locks zones and conditions without a multiverse
Yes it is, nature simply uses trial and error to discover those, and we don't see all the times when one of those wasn't discovered
Why wouldn't it be?
because things had to work out perfectly for us to end up existing, early conditions of the universe, stars creating elements that remain stable, the complexity of cellular information, to say these things just "happened by chance" is really grasping at straws, so much so, that you have to consider infinite universes more plausible than so many things happening by chance.
>how many times will you flip a coin and have it land on heads before you ask yourself if the coin is rigged?
>because things had to work out perfectly for us to end up existing
That's rather meaningless. Might as well say things had to "work out perfectly" for some random rock to exist. I suppose in some sense, that's also true, but you wouldn't say that because you think the rock's existence is irrelevant and banal, whereas our existence is super duper important, but it's actually not, and is no more important than the rock's existence.
>a person is no more important than a random rock
Least nihilistic atheist.
But yeah, humans beings existing is just part of the argument
>a person is no more important than a random rock
Yes. That's objectively true and you have no ability whatsoever to advance the opposite statement using reason and scientific evidence.
>i can throw a rock in a volcano and no one cares
>i can throw a commie out of a helicopter into a volcano and no one cares
Hey, I guess you're actually right.dh
Once again, that just looks at all the winners of evolution, and completely ignores all the elements that didn't turn out to be stable, and all the life forms that failed miserably. All intelligent design is, is just intentionally ignoring all these failures and then crafting a story how the success was 'just meant to be' or due to 'hard work and morality'. Rich people do the exact same shit to justify their wealth, when a lot of them are rich because of plain dumb luck
>Once again, that just looks at all the winners of evolution
I think you misunderstand astronomical improbability of such conditions
It's irrelevant how improbable you imagine it is; it happened, so the improbable dice roll is the one that happened. Just get over it, I guess.
>it happened
that's the point. Occams razor would rather have an intelligent designer or a multiverse than your "randomness" theory
Not really, since an infinite mind that picks sides in desert skirmishes isn't exactly simple
>strawman
Neo-classical theism and rational theology in general has nothing to do with Christianity. (Not to say that they are incompatible)
Gibberish
You admit that a more simple explanation would be a designer or multiverse instead of randomness.
You can become a theist via your own reason.
You don't have to bring up muh desert skirmishes because it's not applicable to the conversation we were having, retard.
Jesus opposed circumcision
>You admit that a more simple explanation would be a designer or multiverse instead of randomness.
No? Like I've been saying for multiple times now, a designer ignores the survivorship bias. Also, no explanation is given for the existence of this designer, and it's mostly just a pathetic attempt to push your religion back onto the intellectual stage it got laughed off of. Most 'intelligent design' is literally Protestantism with pseudo-scientific jargon
The designer needs to be finetuned for creating exactly the world we are in, retard. It's not a solution at all.
Why would the infinitely intelligent source of everything (God) need to be fine tuned?
Because it needs to produce the exact results that you see, you absolute sub-80IQ retard.
Occam's razor is dumb.
It is a fallacy but a useful one.
No, because the sample that that 'astronomical probability' is based upon, just contains all the winners. This makes it a hopelessly biased sample, and completely useless as a statistic to derive any conclusion from
>it is not sufficient to say all of these things happened to occur by random chance
Yes it is.
That is to say that fine tuning is even a thing. It could be an illusion as far as we know.
Why do you need to believe there is a multi-verse just because you don't believe in a god creating this one?
>fine tuning
not a scientific term and totally subjective
thread/
>le god real/no real thread #72826825282929651
tiresome
why aren't these threads banned
Because they are the only posts that generate traffic on this slow ass board. The religious and atheist shit flingers have effectively driven out all of the posters who originally discussed history. Mods don't delete these insanely spammed and redundant threads because otherwise 90% of the board would be dead.
where else can we have a coherent discussion of history? Obviously religion and theism is important to history and philosophy.
Obviously /misc/ is not the place for such discussions.
We can't discuss religion on LULZ because they focus on the empirical.
LULZ is mostly for discussing specific doctrines.
So LULZ is the place to argue about religion, you don't have to be a homosexual about it.
>So LULZ is the place to argue about religion, you don't have to be a homosexual about it.
Kek nobody discusses doctrine or religious historiography here. It's always
>if God real why do I get rejected on dating apps
>if God no real, why do atheists like poopdick?
>Atheists must believe in a multi-universe
No
>in order to discount the evidence of intelligent design in nature
There's none
>>in order to discount the evidence of intelligent design in nature
>There's none
yes there is, and anyone being honest would say so
>anyone being honest would say so
two can play that game: only retards believe in intelligent design.
>the evidence: I don’t understand [thing] therefore a magic man made it
>Darwin doesn't explain the origin of the Universe, for that, I invoke the anthropic principle and the multiverse t. Richard Dawkins
cool I dont agree with dawkins, thankfully there is no book that dictates my orthodoxy so my point is as valid as his since we have the same amount of proof.
I submit that the size and age of THIS universe is sufficient for the application of the anthropic principle. Not only is this possible within the established scientific framework it's practically axiomatic.
So shut the fuck up you illiterate christ nagger.
oh MY SCIENCE!!
YES! now go cut your dick off. The established scientific framework says that that's empowering.
>trannies are cringe so evolution is fake
Nice argument bro.
lol
okay so you all affirm the "current scientific framework(s)" as currently posited?
I don't accept anything as truth since there is no relevance in the idea. There is more validancy in the ideas posited by modern science than the falsehoods created by israeli fools written on papyrus
either way it's israeli fools it seems
Most modern science is done by European men you delusional kike. israelites have contributed little of value to science.
okay so multiverse theory is NOT a kike myth?
Of course it is like most cosmology
Big bang also seems very unlikely or even impossible
Just because israelites use modern science to create new religons doesn't mean much
I take it you have cut your dick off as yeshua commanded?
>evolution and intelligent design are mutually exclusive
Ben pantera also told his followers to cut their dicks off.
>science is fake and gay when it challenges my israeli tall tales
>trannies? c'mon bro, men can't be women, it's basic biological science
lol
but Anon, I'm not a christian, I don't have to accept and welcome trannies into my community
You have to love and pray for those people as per your own doctrine. But you won't because you're just another right wing grifter who cited the parts where fags go to hell and wipes his ass with the parts of the bible inconvenient with your political stance, which you believe in more than you believe in God himself.
based
Yeah it’s strange how modern science is becoming more lolcow’y than Christian tards. I miss the old days
Ben pantera told his followers to eat excrement. Nasty!
But muh quantum foam! Muh Marvel Multiverse of Madness! Muh infinite contractions and expansions! Muh monkey morality!
I don't get the strawman of
>all this proof of God exists and you deny it because you want to be an atheist!
Man I desperately wish I could believe in some kind of higher power or meaning. But there is zero evidence. There is zero indication of anything special at all about reality.
>I desperately wish I could believe in some kind of higher power or meaning
You could, you just choose not to.
Look at your wall right now which I assume will be white as walls are typically painted white. Convince yourself that it is painted black. Fully convince yourself. Then I will admit God is real.
What evidence do you have that God is not real?
What evidence do you have that your wall is not painted black? It could actually be black and you simply refuse to have faith that whitr is black. Oh ye of little faith, can you not even tell me white is black?
You're looking at a white wall and saying "The wall is black. I have no evidence the wall is black but prove to me without me looking at the evidence that the wall is white. You're stupid for thinking the wall is actually white when I can see with my eyes closed that it is black."
How many spoonfuls of poo did you eat after the fifth one today, as jeshua ben pantera commanded?
This, i think if religious people could atleast all agree on one religion that could be enough for me. But with zero evidence and a dozen major religions all with parallel beliefs. Its simply not rational to believe.
yeah religious people don't understand that the overly optimistic positions they hold about existence is exactly why I'm skeptical. Deists are more understandable in this regard.
Deism isn't comforting in any way
Assume there is a Creator Being, some type of entity which is the cause of reality.
Unlike religion this is in no way optimistic vompared to a lack of such being. What evidence do we haveto go on that this entity has beliefs or predispositions? If it has motivations they could be everything humans consider evil, or incomprehensible in an alien way that yet results only in human suffering by coincidence. Certainly there would be no evidence it is something worthy of praise rather than condemnation, love rather than hate. Without religion there is no basis to even call this entity God as there is no axiomatic proof of authority, it is in a moral sense equal to us just more powerful. So all we havesaid is there is an alien power that created everything and might be an evil insane being which loves our suffering as likely as anything.
Deism is a cop out
Calvinism or deism are the only denominations compatible with the current paradigms of reality as understood by skeptics. Many deists hold the opinion that God(s) exists, the universe was created, and bad thing happen because he doesn't want to be a celestial janny.
Calvinism sidesteps every question that gets thrown at them by atheists with, "because God said so".
everything else is cope and mental gymnastics
Calvinism has zero proof or evidence to suggest an afterlife exists it is schizo tier
>intelligent design
The universe itself is this, comparing life to the universe and calling life intelligent design is extremely retarded
I'm a theist but I really do not understand the fine tuning argument, it doesn't intuitively feel like the smoking gun in the same way that the cosmological argument does so I must be missing something
Cosmological argument is stupid but I'm not going to explain basic philosophy to you
Read a book
Even the fucking indians dismissed the argument thousands of years ago
No scientist would claim to know the preponderance of reality. So how does the fine tuning argument make any sense when we have zero idea of the size of anything.
must believe in a multi-universe in order to discount the evidence of intelligent design in nature
No they don't, intelligent design ignores the survivorship bias
must believe in a multi-universe in order to discount the evidence of intelligent design in nature
There's no evidence of intelligent design in nature, and a "multi-universe" isn't any less plausible than ""intelligent design"".
None of that is necessary.
For the answer to how the universe came to be for an atheist's perspective it can be unknown. Which is intellectually honest.
Scientists have ideas and they are the ones taking interest in figuring it out. It rightly should be left to scientist to figure out.
must believe in a multi-universe in order to discount the evidence of intelligent design in nature
No we don't
>israelite worshiper views his retarded cock snipper fairy tales as ultimate truth
>thinks not only is it intellectually valid but that it should be forced on those who don't worship israelites
Do you rely on faith that there's no leprechauns?
No, what level is your reading comprehension at?
>evidence of intelligent design means the magic israelite in the sky is real
egocentric christian cope, Gaia anf Uranus created the universe.
they also rely on the idea of big bang/heliocentrism/evolution/globe earth being true, despite lacking any evidence whatsoever
>globe earth lacking any evidence
>he says this when people back in fucking antiquity have not only been able to not only determine the earth is round, but even get a rough estimate of its size
idea that people in antiquity determined that earth was round is a meme
memes are not evidence
try again
forgot the pic
You can be an atheist and still believe in intelligent design.
The problem is, the intelligent design/fine tuned universe model doesn't get you very far. The logical jump from 'the universe has been created' to belief in this desert god or that elephant divinity is vast and completely unjustifiable.
EVERYBODY SHUT THE FUCK UP
>EVERYBODY SHUT THE FUCK UP
EVERYBODY SHUT THE FUCK UP
>EVERYBODY SHUT THE FUCK UP
Suppose the universe was created by God.
Why did God create it the way it is?
And why is God the way he is?
These questions are relevant even if we don't know which god is the true one.
If you think about it for one nanosecond, the probability that God is the way he is in the order of one ligmallionth.
Since rare random events never happen randomly, it could only mean one of two things:
1. There are infinitely many parallel ever-so-slightly-differing gods who each created their own ever-so-slightly different universe with each their own life;
2. God was intelligently designed by an infinitely wise creator.
But alternative 1 is basically a cope for people who don't want to accept the truth, so 2 simply HAS TO BE TRUE!
It henceforth follows from the fundamental laws of probability that all non-believers in God-God are COPING RETARDS.