FT, I gotta give it to you man. You start these threads, and use the word, God. Sooner or later stu will appear, but I think you have to say God three times Now, after stu appears, then jem comes very shortly thereafter to resume their their aeons old war. I try to keep up, but they have been at this so long! Fight the good fight, FT!
From what he says I think Collins knows full well that whatever magnificent revelations are to come about, they will as always, be in the science of the future, not out of blind unreasoning religious beliefs from the past.
when you explain where you plenty of science showing life evolving from non life you can will no longer be a troll. when you explain why know more than penrose about probability theory... you might not be a troll. til then you are the biggest troll on et by 200 percent.
Collins would expect science to continue to confirm the appearance of amazing fine tuning in our universe. In fact if you keep up with this it was collins arguments (no sure if he originated them) showing that even multiverse does not the appearance of fine tunings which seemed to cause Hawking to then suggest a multiverse coupled with a top down approach which could explain it. Collins also expects even trolls like stu should understand that there is no scientific proof or evidence that life evolved from non life here on earth.
Yet three more examples of why you've zero credibility. "Collins would expect science to continue to confirm the appearance of amazing fine tuning " Then according to what you say, by the same reasoning Collins would expect to confirm the amazing appearance of a flat earth. As for the rest of it if you're going to talk out your ass, at least try and make your sentences coherent. "it was collins arguments (no sure if he originated them) showing that even multiverse does not the appearance of fine tunings" "Collins would expect science to continue to confirm the appearance of amazing fine tuning " Which one you going to stumble for? Can't be both. On the other hand in your crazy world, the more contradictory the better apparently. You used a sockpuppet and accused others of using a sockpuppet. You incessantly troll out the same old bs and accuse others of being a troll. See the pattern yet?
http://www.christianpost.com/news/f...admits-universes-preciseness-a-problem-51416/ Here is a pattern we have seen hundreds of times ... I back up my statements with citations you lie. âIf they (constants in the universe) were set at a value that was just a tiny bit different, one part in a billion, the whole thing wouldnât work anymore,â said Collins, the director of the National Institutes of Health, during the 31st Annual Christian Scholarsâ Conference at Pepperdine University in Malibu, Calif. These constants regarding the behavior of matter and energy â such as strong and weak nuclear forces, gravity, and the speed of light â have to be precisely right during the Big Bang for life as we know it to exist. âTo get our universe, with all of its potential for complexities or any kind of potential for any kind of life form, everything has to be precisely defined on this knife edge of improbability,â said the world renowned scientist. âThat forces a conclusion. If you are an atheist, either it is just a lucky break and the odds are so remote, or you have to go to this multiverse hypothesis, which says that there must be almost an infinite number of parallel universes that have different values of those constants,â explained Collins to Christian scholars of various disciplines in the audience. âAnd of course we are here and so we must have won the lottery, we must be in the one where everything worked.â There are some serious scientists in the world, however, such as English theoretical physicist and cosmologist Stephen Hawking, who believe in the multiverse hypothesis. ... --- Stu I have a question why do you choose to remain so ignorant about science and then lie about it so often? I know you believe you understand probabilities better than Penrose. And you understand tunings better than Hawking... but, are you now saying this premier scientist is lying to you also? My recent analysis of your behavior is that you manifest delusions to support your narcissistic worldview... and now when faced with reality that dissonance may cause you to snap.
One problem has always been Jem, you are constantly trying to argue that a particular scientist says X...therefore everything else to do with X can be dismissed for no good reason. Collins has given his personal opinion in the world of religion for something called fine tuning. Collins has no science which supports his religious view about that so called fine tuning. Other scientists every bit as eminent as Collins perhaps more so in their respective fields, don't agree with him, and give perfectly reasonable explanations about so called fine tunings, which dispute entirely what Collins says. They too do not have the overall hard science to support their views, however, generally and more compellingly do fit with how the universe is scientifically observed to actually work, where religious claims simply just don't. Citations from websites with the name "christian post" is a big clue as to how its editorial is likely going to be extremely biased. So to keep referring to the multiverse hypothesis to excuse the religious argument for assuming without it, all that's left is a lucky break is disingenuous and plain wrong thinking, as other scientists do confirm. You don't even have to think of it in scientific terms to see how unnecessarily vague the religious fine tuning approach is. As Collins confirms, it's only his (religious) belief anyway. With incomplete scientific information the universe appears fine tuned. With incomplete scientific information , the earth appears flat. I've given you other information, reasons, links and citations too, which you invariably dismiss out of hand, get abusive about or go into denial over. Because something doesn't fit with yourt religious beliefs doesn't mean it's a lie.
As predicted, I backed up my statements with proof and you came backed and distorted and lied. All you have done is spew b.s. So lets get this straight. Is collins wrong? The former director of the NIH? Show us how with links to real science.