Posted: Nov 08, 2018 3:38 pm
ughaibu wrote:Amongst the scientists who endorse fine-tuning as a problem in physics, is Dawkins.
Why would anybody give a crap what Dawkins thinks about this? He isn't a physicist.
Meanwhile, I've explained in detail why everything you've said is arse-water. There are fine-tuning problems in physics having to do with specific models and certain parameters contained therein having to hit a narrow range of values. This is nothing to do with the universe being fine-tuned for anything. It's all bass-ackwards.
If you're on the other side from Dawkins, what side are you on?
I can't speak for anybody else, but I'm on the side of understanding what fine-tuning is, and why it poses particular problems. You, clearly, have no interest in that.