“The very nature of the multiverse “theory” precludes there ever being any evidence to support it.”
It’s also oxymoronic in the sense that the universe is everything that exists, which means that “multiverses” are part of our universe.
I see the multiverses as similar in kind to the theory of “dark” matter and “dark” energy. Scientists find a phenomenon that no current theory can explain, so they get busy concocting new substances to try to rescue their current model of how things work, rather than face the much more difficult challenge of coming up with a new model-and that’s understandable.
I have a suspicion that dark matter and energy and multiverses have more in common with phlogiston than with anything real.
“It’s also oxymoronic in the sense that the universe is everything that exists, which means that “multiverses” are part of our universe.”
Well, you can define the universe as everything that exists, which by definition rules out any multiverse. Or you can define the universe as everything that it is possible for use to observe. In that case, we can never observe any evidence for the multiverse so it’s a scientific dead end.
I think the dark matter/dark energy are just cosmic “fudge factors” to plug deficiencies in the current theories, but the multiverse stuff is just philosophy being done by people who are unqualified to do philosophy, because they’ve hit a brick wall that science can never penetrate. Really they should be leaving the philosophy to philosophers, but many people seem to have adopted the notion that science is the only legitimate means to reliable knowledge, so they do not want to admit that there are questions science can never answer, and have resorted to this pseudophilosophy in an attempt to pretend that science can answer such questions.