I was not arguing either... I was arguing that many scientists state the universe appears fine tuned and you all were lying your asses off.
Whereas if you had been arguing many scientists state the universe appears fine tuned but isn't because.... you would not have been lying your ass off.
don't you get tired of losing and trying to save face by obfuscation. Many scientists argue our universe appears or is fine tuned... period. Science currently holds no proven, observed or verified sxplanation for the appearance of the fine tuning of the constants. Many scientists offer speculative explanations for the appearance of fine tunings.
The universe is indeed fine tuned to a high degree, but this does not require any miracles or supernatural explanations. Most string theory variants are compatible with or even require the existence of multiple universes with different physical constants. Therefore, although a multiverse can not be directly observed, it is highly plausible. No god necessary for doing the fine-tuning. Not even Santa Claus.
Purpose is a loaded word here. End is better suited to Natural Selection, which determines the survival or demise of genes. ID may not be Creationism per se, but they both share the same fundamental premise of a Supernatural operation. They differ in that ID cloaks itself in the guise of (pseudo) science, whereas creationsm is content to bask in fantastic mythology. ID is but a flimsy and transparent trojan horse for fundamentalist religious beliefs.
bravo... after 7 years you accept the universe is finely tuned. now lets work on the explanations.... How would you calculate "highly plausible".... when the multiverse is pure speculation and string theory is just a collection of ideas. Have we observed an alternate universe... have we been testing for one... have we found it. Has string theory become a proven scientific theory?