That’s my other argument.

I already reference it in the article you are commenting on:

…getting a God could well be even more lucky than accidental fine tuning without a multiverse (see The Argument from Specified Complexity against Supernaturalism); much more so, with.

I call it The Hidden Fallacy in the Fine Tuning Argument. Also referenced in this article.

There are a “bazillion” possible gods, if one considers every wild and baseless speculation to be “possible”. If there is a primordial uncreated being it could just as well have been an unconscious amorphous blob, or a non-creative being, or a being that prefers to create only inanimate objects, or a “bazillion” other “possible” gods.

Why not save a step, as Carl Sagan, and many others, have suggested? As always, the speculation of god solves nothing, only makes the problems worse, because questions about the details of what we observe to exist are infinitely more tractable than the same questions applied to items of pure idle speculation such as god.

Your post is very good on the supposed fine tuning of supposed fundamental constants, but I prefer the primary argument that if fine tuning is to considered then god would be the most fine tuned, and therefore most unlikely, thing of all.

Thank you. I appreciate that. So I did this…

Update: I have amended this article by replacing that link with an update on the project from 2019, since the more salient point was that the theory makes predictions (so even that it hasn’t yet confirmed that one still exemplifies the point).

Thank you for the response. I appreciate the link with the article and responses

John: Even if you’re correct, none of that is relevant, because Trump is still fucking worse. The Dems are pitiful on Israel and always have been, but they are capable of criticizing Netanyahu at all and acknowledging that there is valid disagreement and criticism of Israel. Schumer has recently gotten into hot water by saying that Trump isn’t an anti-Semite but that calling Israeli actions genocide is, but even he is clear that he accepts criticism of Israel as not inherently anti-Semitic. For this, Trump has called him Palestinian.

It is really incredible how people can fail to realize that voting for the best possible outcome and against fascism isn’t voting for perfection.

Delusionally repeating your delusional change of subject is not a productive course of action here.

You are now not even talking about anything we originally were.

This is just drink uncling. I suggest you go back to defending your original point, or conceding it was false, or going somewhere else to peddle irrelevant animus toward a past president who wasn’t even on the ballot in the 2024 election.

I was not the original commentor, nor do I agree with what he said about criticizing trump being “hyper-partisan” or at all unjustified. I was responding to the claim that biden worked on the ceasefire for months, he didn’t. His actions directly delayed a ceasefire and provided cover for israel’s genocide through propaganda and financial aid. Which of my claims exactly were speculative:
The assertion that biden said hamas decapitated 40 babies on october 7th is on video and has been reported https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2023/10/12/white-house-walks-back-bidens-claim-he-saw-children-beheaded-by-hamas. You can’t say that he simply fell victim to false intelligence reports since he claimed there was video evidence which never existed.

My claim that biden could have caused a ceasefire earlier by threatening to end weapons shipments is not simply speculation since exactly that has been done before, I provided the article about it. US. power has decreased but israel still largely relies on us financial.

My third claim that biden has already admitted to being ideologically pro-israel is given in the video I linked.

If arming a genocide is not enough what would it take to convince you not to support the democrats

Speculation does not replace fact. And changing the subject does not replace reality.

So, nice try, but pretending you didn’t just say a bunch of false things that were flatly disproved, by trying to change the subject and make different (much less evidential and more opinionary) claims that don’t support any point you were originally trying to make nor rebut any point I just made, is a fun example of delusional behavior, but it is of no relevance to what we are supposed to be talking about.

Biden may have been bad at things, but it’s pointless to argue that, because Trump was worse at every one of those things. Yet evidently you voted (directly or by omission) for the worse outcome (or rooted for it, if you’re not American). Because, I suppose, you are Bad at Trolley Problems, like everyone who chose Trump instead of Harris (who is not Biden) to be our President.

No comments of yours have been deleted.

Are you confused by the fact that they go to moderation before publishing?