Yes; but — how on the basis of the scientific method would science actually be able to tell whether the effects in question were caused by an intelligent designer or a multiverse?
If you think we ought to redefine "universe" to accommodate multiverse(s), then we'll have to get a whole new word for whatever we come up with. For "universe" denotes "oneness," an all-encompassing, unified order. Unless we can show that the sum of all possible multiverses constitutes a "one." But this doesn't look like a scientific problem to me, FWIW.
Last time I checked, there were dozens of multiverse theories. As a purely practical matter, how can any of them be tested since all are, in principle, unobservable on the basis of direct perception (just as the intelligent designer is also "unobservable" on the basis of sensory experience)?
Gee, you have to go rain on his parade.....
Science can say nothing about God unless you define God. Gravity outside of our universe suggests matter outside of our universe which suggests a parrallel universe. This supports multiverse theory.
The interesting thing is, deciding that gravitational permutations is caused by multiverses when said multiverses cannot be observed or otherwise detected puts them in the same boat that they criticize Christians and creationists in.
When Christians claim that miracles are evidence of answered prayer, the challenge is given that one cannot know the source of the miracle. Here, there is no way to determine the source of the apparent gravitational permutations. The conclusion that it’s a multiverse has no more substance than they claim that stating God was the source of answered prayer.
It’s a double standard then. If it can’t be determined that the source is God because He’s indeterminate, then likewise it cannot be determined that the source is a multiverse. The *evidence* does not lean one way or the other. Only the preferences of the observer do.