Gabriel Lagrangian

@astro_jaz I'm watching it right now Jasmine 🙂🙂

PROJECT HAIL MARY IS OUT ON STREAMING PLATFORMS!!!!!

@darwintojesus I could talk to you about this science Daniel. It's a theory of physics called general relativity. It just helps us understand the past history of the observable universe.

God.

How often would it be incompatible with life? Can you show me the calculations?

What would be your best argument be that we don't live in that univerese?

@michaelod0123 @darwintojesus @LyingWrongAgain You guys use the lack of scientific understanding of abiogenesis as an argument for a designer but if the universe could create life by abiogenesis... through highly fine tuned laws of physics... you would also use that as evidence for a designer.

@michaelod0123 @darwintojesus @LyingWrongAgain But that's where you guys exhaust me. If physics finds the TOE, then fine tuning. If physics can't, then the parameters are fine tuned.

Yes, Roger Penrose estimated that. Here’s Roger Penrose talking about his estimate and what it means

@michaelod0123 @darwintojesus @LyingWrongAgain And then you guys argue that if science supports the existence of life it's evidence for a designer but also if science doesn't support the existence of life it's evidence for a designer.

@michaelod0123 @darwintojesus @LyingWrongAgain I understand what your saying. But I feel like even this is not the best fine tuning argument. Physicist in the future might find a theory that has less or maybe 0 free parameters.

@Jabert00 @darwintojesus @LyingWrongAgain No I’m not necessarily talking about a universe run by general relativity and the standard model. I’m only specifying that in such a universe the constants can vary broadly and still support life.

@darwintojesus This is a rage bait post. There are people that don't believe in God. You used to be one of them. Make better posts.

There is no such thing as an atheist.

@michaelod0123 @darwintojesus @LyingWrongAgain You're talking about a universe that is run by the Standard Model and General Relativity but in the space of it's free parameters, life exists in most of that parameter space? Fine structure constant is ten times larger... electron mass goes to zero etc etc

@Jabert00 @darwintojesus @LyingWrongAgain For example, a universe where many or most of the constants of the laws of nature could vary over a broad ranges of values and still be compatible with life.

@michaelod0123 @darwintojesus @LyingWrongAgain So if we lived in a universe where human biology and chemistry where impossible, juste a desolate wasteland of different physical constants exist BUT nonetheless humans with sentience still exist... that would count against FTA?

@michaelod0123 @darwintojesus @LyingWrongAgain What would a universe with no fine tuning look like?

@Jabert00 @darwintojesus @LyingWrongAgain Of course. If there were a lack of fine tuning then the argument wouldn’t go through.

@michaelod0123 @darwintojesus @LyingWrongAgain Is there any possible observation that we could make about the universe that woul not fit the FTA?

@Jabert00 @darwintojesus @LyingWrongAgain I think you misunderstand the argument. In no sense does the FTA position that the current observational understanding of the universe is exactly what theism predicts. Rather, it posits that design is the best explanation of that observational data.

@michaelod0123 @darwintojesus @LyingWrongAgain No no, don't try to obfuscate. If you guy think that our current observational understanding of the physical universe is exactly what theism predicts, YOU would have proclaimed it long time ago. Come on my guy.

@Jabert00 @darwintojesus @LyingWrongAgain Carroll seems to confuse a metaphysical explanation with a scientific theory here, as he does elsewhere when commenting on the fine tuning argument. The inference in FTA can’t be impugned on the basis that it doesn’t provide some prediction that it never intends to make.

@darwintojesus @dannyphiltalk The way you use your atheist past does not necessarily make you more credible.

@dannyphiltalk This is literally how 99% of atheists argue my dude.

What frustrates me about GodLogic’s approach is that disproving Islam gets treated as if it somehow establishes Christianity by default. Those are two entirely separate conversations: “Why is Islam false?” and “Why is Christianity true?” Avery’s arguments are almost entirely anti-Islamic, not (good) positive arguments for any particular Christian doctrine, church, Trinity, or hypostatic union. If your brand is basically “against Islam,” then just be honest about that instead of subtly funneling doubters toward an underdeveloped form of Mere Christianity (Cleave would probably disagree, I'm not sure). But at the same time, we know GL’s goal is evangelizing, so he can’t really take that approach.

@elleloveCHI Maybe not the best person, but not horrible I hope.

I'm literally not sorry if I find out any of you are horrible people so just don't be

@michaelod0123 @LyingWrongAgain @darwintojesus

@michaelod0123 @LyingWrongAgain @darwintojesus Take for example the component of the standard model called quantum chromodynamics. This theory can explain the mass of the proton with almost 0 free parameters.

@michaelod0123 @darwintojesus @LyingWrongAgain One argument that Sean Carroll has put forth about the low entropy beginning of a large universe like ours, is that the theism community could have predicted our current observational knowledge of the universe decades or centuries ago.

@Jabert00 @darwintojesus @LyingWrongAgain But it isn’t evidence that the universe is not fine tuned for life. At best it’s just a question about why it’s so fine tuned but not more fine tuned.