[Mr. Silverback]

Filo, if there's no evidence of a non-naturalistic reality as you claim, and indeed, the total lack of evidence is so obvious that anyone who believes there may be a God is a moron, then how could an article like this one even exist?

And why is it that you place an asterisk next to God's name? Do you think He used steroids to get His home run record?

[Filo]

Filo, if there's no evidence of a non-naturalistic reality as you claim, and indeed, the total lack of evidence is so obvious that anyone who believes there may be a God is a moron, then how could an article like this one even exist?

The answer to your question is in the question. . .

And why is it that you place an asterisk next to God's name? Do you think He used steroids to get His home run record?

Clearly. ;)

Actually I put that there in deference to those who do believe.

Normally I wouldn't capitalize, but since I do I don't want it assumed that my doing so means I am a believer.

[tpanther]

I’m glad you posted that article:

Call it a fluke, a mystery, a miracle. Or call it the biggest problem in physics. Short of invoking a benevolent creator, many physicists see only one possible explanation: Our universe may be but one of perhaps infinitely many universes in an inconceivably vast multi­verse. Most of those universes are barren, but some, like ours, have conditions suitable for life.

---

But once a theory makes liberals uncomfortable about God, they rush to court.

Where are the multiple liberal lawsuits over multiverse theory?

It’s about the science my eye!