[kosciusko51]

They posit the multiverse because the other option is unacceptable to them.

[Governor Dinwiddie]

John 1:1–5

¹ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ² The same was in the beginning with God. ³All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. ⁴ In him was life; and the life was the light of men. ⁵ And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

[allendale]

In a universe with billions and billions of galaxies and trillions and trillions of stars, the “astronomically” low probability that all the factors necessary to replicate what happened on earth becomes a liklyhood. Yet given those same laws of physics especially general relativity, it is impossible for biological and mechanical entities to cross those distances and actually visit earth. Now radio waves of various sorts and clever use of earth’s atmosphere as a video screen is another matter entirely. Earth has been broadcasting in analog for 120 years and in digital for about sixty. An overt answer may be forthcoming or has already reached us.

[AndyTheBear]

The hope is that this allows us to give a “monkeys on typewriters” explanation of the fine-tuning

Simple way to look at it is this. How are we lucky enough to find the one page the monkey happened to get right by chance?

Many who defend the multi-verse inference reference the "weak anthropic principle", which argues that since we are intelligent observers of a universe, it is natural for us to exist in such a universe.

However this "naturalness" does not follow unless our nature is such that we exist with enough independence from universes that we would "show up" in the right kind naturally.

If however, we do not have some kind of soul or self that could have "shown up" in the right kind of universe, but are just a physical feature of the universe we are in, the "weak anthropic principle" does not save the inference, as it relies on the presumption that we naturally select a kind of universe. Rather it would be more likely we would simply not exist as intelligent beings at all, and other universes where things were different would have absolutely nothing to do with us.

[Captain Compassion]

Life adapts to the universe. The universe does not adapt to life. The probability of there being live in the universe is 100% because here we are.

[dangus]

I believe in God, and not multiverses, but I’m not sure his analogy of the Joker and the Monkey is applicable: you’re intuitively unlikely to believe the monkey’s random selection of keys is what saved you. But what if you woke up and found a billion dead people and you were the only survivor? What if you HAD to ask, “why me?”

Yes, I know we don’t know of countless other universes; In this analogy, the billion dead people represent not a countless other known universes that failed, but the countless other possibilities that wouldn’t result in life.

What Goff DOES plainly accomplish is he creates a much higher bar to assert that Occam’s razor means we should presume the existences of multiverses rather than God.

[Migraine]

we could never have observed a non-fine-tuned universe

I've got news for you; the existence of non-sequiturs does not preclude nor foreclose on the non-existence of sequiturs (unless you are in Antarctica, where the obverse would obtain).

[AndyTheBear]

You wake up to find yourself in a room sat opposite the Joker (from Batman) and a monkey called Joey on a typewriter. The Joker tells you that while you were unconscious, he decided to play a little game. He gave Joey one hour to bash on the typewriter, committing to release you if Joey wrote some English or to kill you before you regained consciousness if he didn’t. Fortunately, Joey has typed “I love how yellow bananas are,” and hence you are to be released.

Good way to explain the flaw with the "weak anthropic" attempt to save the multiverse inference. But still, I think the reason the error is made is worth considering. It is hard for human beings to not intuitively smuggle in the idea that we are somehow independent of the physical universe such that our existence is a given and that we could have experienced a different world. Ironically this mistake is made by people defending materialism--they accidently deny it even as they argue for it.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

Short answer: Cognito, ergo sum.

[Daveinyork]

The multiverse is fun in science fiction, the key word being fiction.

[airdalechief]

Do I think we are the only life in this multiverse?

No.

[equaviator]

There’s nothing like the universe to bring you down to earth.

[Heartlander]

What are the odds of all of this occurring as a cosmic accident?

Cosmic Constants

• Gravitational force constant
  
• Electromagnetic force constant
  
• Strong nuclear force constant
  
• Weak nuclear force constant
  
• Cosmological constant

Initial Conditions and “Brute Facts”

• Initial distribution of mass energy
  
• Ratio of masses for protons and electrons
  
• Velocity of light
  
• Mass excess of neutron over proton
• Principle of quantization
  
• Pauli Exclusion Principle

Solar System Conditions

• Near inner edge of circumstellar habitable zone
  
• Low-eccentricity orbit outside spin-orbit and giant planet resonances
  
• A few, large Jupiter-mass planetary neighbors in large circular orbits
  
• Outside spiral arm of galaxy
  
• Near co-rotation circle of galaxy, in circular orbit around galactic center
  
• Within the galactic habitable zone
  
• Human advancement occurs during the cosmic habitable age

“Local” Planetary Conditions

• Steady plate tectonics with right kind of geological interior
  
• Right amount of water in crust
  
• Sun is the right type star for life
  
• Large moon with right rotation period
  
• Stable atmosphere
  
• Proper concentration of sulfur
• Ability to create fire
  
• Right planetary mass
  
• Unique solar eclipse
  
• Cosmic shield
  
• Information rich biosphere

Human Life

• Origin of life hurdles
  
• DNA has; Functional Information - Encoder - Error Correction - Decoder
• DNA contains multi-layered information that reads both forward and backwards - DNA stores data more efficiently than anything we've created - and a majority of DNA contains metainformation
  
• Complex pieces of molecular machinery in the cell
• Human body
  
• The information enigma
  
• Morality
  
• Consciousness
  
• Free will
  
• Justice
  
• Perception
  
• Human language
  
• Recognizing art in nature
  

[StAnDeliver]

"However, as scientists have studied the fundamental principles that govern our universe, they have discovered that the odds of a universe like ours being compatible with life are astronomically low."

False statement and all that follows is null.

Cites a 2016 book and seems willfully blind to the exponential explosion of exoplanet discovery in that ensuing period.

No, it is simply a matter of whether a "Goldilocks zone" civilization exists now (in the recessive time frame pretty much once you get past Proxima), or existed then (far more likely); or a proto-planet in pre-civilization mode (let's go!).

[californian by choice]

If our existence has no explanation, what if we do with the first explanation ... GOD

[skepsel]

It was the mice.

Or the Infinite Improbability Drive!

[PIF]

Perhaps there is some other way of explaining it. Or perhaps we just got lucky.

—
Or just maybe you guys don’t know everything or even what you think you know is wrong?

[jdsteel]

Not much “Science” in that ridiculous piece of junk Philosophy.

[Seruzawa]

This whole subject is just a rabbit hole so they can justify grant money. The laws of the universe are as they are. They aren’t likely or unlikely. They’ll never find the spirit with radio telescopes or particle accelerators.

[Boogieman]

The very nature of the multiverse “theory” precludes there ever being any evidence to support it. It’s a logical impossibility. That’s why it can never actually be a scientific theory, or a hypothesis, or even a postulate. It’s nothing more than philosophical speculation dressed up as science.