[john in springfield]

All you said was, "To say "the universe is 'perfect for life' is to say '...even though the circumstances of our existence are too bizarre to comprehend in any meaningfully complete way, I know for certain that if things were bizarre in a even slightly different way, life could not exist.'"

That is far from an ignorant position. Physicists, based on their knowledge of physics and the physical universe, can and do project that if any one of a fairly long list of parameters were slightly different, not only would it be impossible for our kind of life to exist, it would -- as far as we're able to determine -- be impossible for ANY kind of life to exist.

And don't talk to me about "argumentum ad hominem." You're the one who started the ad hominem attack by labeling anyone who doesn't agree with your apparently entirely UNINFORMED opinion as "incredibly ignorant" and "childish."

And no, I don't have a PhD in physics either, but at least I HAVE studied it up through quantum mechanics.

[Psycho_Bunny]

The statement I scoffed at did not parse "life as we know it" the way you did. Had it, I wouldn't have dismissed the author out of hand because taking care of one's wording indicates a completeness of thought that usually warrants consideration.

I argued against the perspective of the author. You've attempted a proof against my statement by "correcting" his and using the correction against me. That is an informal fallacy.