I wished to present a neat, simple and powerful five fingered death punch to the concept of the multiverse.
The multiverse is a mythological tale which some atheists accept when evidence contradicts their preferred theories/worldviews.
Here are the five point: 1) Presupposes Atheism 2) No Evidence 3) Atheist Supernaturalism 4) Illogical
5) Proves God’s Existence
If you are dealing with an atheist who claims to base their atheism on science or otherwise claims to build their worldview via the scientific method; that they bring up the multiverse is a gift to you.
Referring to the universe’s expansion via mass density with a fine tuned value of circa one part in 1060 and space energy density with a the value of circa one part in 10120, physicist Lawrence Krauss wrote that this is “the most extreme fine-tuning problem known in physics.”1
Astronomers Idit Zehavi and Avishai Dekel write that, “This type of universe…requires a degree of fine tuning in the initial conditions that is in apparent conflict with ‘common wisdom.’”2
Physicist N. Straumann writes that we are “confronted with a disturbing cosmic coincidence problem”3 (apparently, “coincidence” means fine tuned).
Some do not hold to the multiverse as various existing at the same time but as preceding one from another, the oscillation model, as a Big Bang is followed by a Big Crunch, etc. This appeal to the oscillation-of-the-gaps “relieve us of the necessity of understanding the origin of matter at any finite time in the past” 4 as was stated by physicist Robert Dicke. Of course, this relieves us of no such thing as it merely pushes the question further back in time.
I think that Bertrand Russell said it best—or, is it worse?—“The universe is just there, and that’s all.”5
1) Presupposes Atheism:
It just about says it all that the best and/or only response that atheists have concocted in light of the scientific evidence of the universe’s fine tuning is that if it were not so we would not be here to discuss it. This response is actually the only logical conclusion for an atheist who answers all of life’s deepest questions by stating, “It just is…it just is and that’s all…it just happened…it just happened to have happened that way…coincidence…chance…accident…luck…,” etc.
Basically the modern multiverse mythos grew out of a presupposition of atheism whereby evidence of design is not only said to be non-existent but impossible. Since their worldview negates even the possibility of design, no matter how much evidence there is or how convincing it is, they are exercising the very opposite of freethougth; this is well-within-the-box-restricted-group-think.
In this view, an atheist could find out that if absolutely everything in the universe did not originated the way it did and if it was not the way that it is, life would be impossible and the universe itself would not exist and will simply say, “What a coincidinc!” They could find out that if I did not type a period at the end of this sentence life would be impossible and would say, “Well, obviously he typed the period or we would not be here to discuss it”
This is the it just is of the gaps. It is obviously a desperate, scientifically bankrupt and logically jejune non-response.
Thus, point one is that no matter what the evidence, how much there is of it, regardless of how compelling: it will be denied due to an atheistic presupposition. Atheism makes a person deny the evidence, not follow it where it leads and be satisfied concocting a myth.
2) No Evidence:
One thing that must be noted when discussing the multiverse is that there is no evidence for it whatsoever. It is a position which is held by faith (and here I am employing the fallacious atheist talking point mis-definition of “faith” as belief without evidence).
Some will point to models of the multiverse that have been concocted by cosmologists. Yet, these are merely illustrations of the myth. I once wrote that, essentially, if we are simply concocting theories out of thin air we might as well state that our universe is inside of a marble with which an alien child is playing. Someone disparaged my remark stating that no such model has been proposed. Yet, that is only because no one has bothered modeling that; we could model anything even if we have to, as does Stephen Hawkings, appeal to “imaginary time.”
Thus, for the atheist who even pretends to base their particular worldview upon the tangible, upon science, point two is that the multiverse is not even an option—if, that is, they are consistent in their thinking—because there is absolutely no evidence for it whatsoever.
3) Atheist Supernaturalism:
When confronted with the evidence for a universe that is fine tuned for life—in fact, fine tuned to exist in the first place—some atheists appeal to life having been designed by alien beings, Francis Crick is one such atheist. David Berlinski is an example of an agnostic who accepts the evidence for design whilst being uncertain as to who/what was the designer(s).
It is precisely when confronted with the evidence for a fine tuned universe that the atheist does that which they would condemn if a believer did it: they retreat into their supernatural realm. The multiverse is the atheist supernatural realm for numerous reasons such as: 1) It is intangible. 2) Unobserved. 3) Un-evidenced. 4) Not experimented upon. 5) Un-disprovable (from their point of view, not from mine; see point 4 below). 6) Believed upon by “faith.” 7) Held to as a consoling delusion—to escape a philosophically inconvenient reality that is supported by evidence.
8) Concocted as an escape mechanism—escape from scientific evidence.
Moreover, the multiverse: 9) Is omnipresent. 10) Is omnipotent (containing the power to created anything).
11) Omniscient (containing all the information that is necessary for “creating,” populating and maintaining the various universes).
12) It created all things both seen and unseen.
13) It is the eternal uncaused first cause.
Think about it as I juxtapose the atheistic oppion on such matters:
It is ignorant and superstitious to believe that God made everything out of nothing.
It is rational and scientific to believe that nothing made everything out of nothing.It is ignorant and superstitious to believe that God is eternal.
It is rational and scientific to believe that matter is eternal.God is an effect and must have had a cause.
Matter is the uncaused first cause.If God made everything, then who made God?
Matter made everything and nothing made matter.
Thus, point three is that the atheist is left appealing to a mysterious place somewhere out there, outside and beyond our universe, where their atheistic “faith” is based and finds its being.
4) Illogical:
There are various multiverse concepts from the New Age/New Physics inspired. Such was the case with the propaganda film What the Bleep Do We Know!?. This film envisages concepts such as that if I am driving along and come to a fork in the road and turn right there emerges a permutation in which this leads to certain outcomes and there emerges another permutation in which I tuned left and certain other outcomes ensue.There are also concepts which take the idea of all possible scenarios playing out to a whole other level: such as that there is another permutation, another vast universe will all of its glorious components, that is exactly like this one except that one of the hairs in my left ear is half of a nanometer shorter. Of course, there is another one where that hair is half of a nanometer longer, etc. The concept of the multiverse is logically self refuting or illogical. If the multiverse is, then each permutation is valid. Thus, if according to at least one of those permutations there are no other permutations then there is no multiverse.
This is not merely to state that there is a multiverse of which this single permutation, a universe, is unaware but what is in view is an actual universe according to which no multiverse exists, there is no multiversality anywhere at all. This option would have to be logically accepted and invalidates the concept of the multiverse.
And so, point four is that if we grant the multiverse, thus granting all possible fine tunings, we end up accepting a fine tuning according to which there are no other fine tunings.
5) Proves God’s Existence:
Point five is quite simple. Simply grant the multiverse to the atheist and conclude that in at least one permutation; God exists. Why not? All possibilities are played out and are valid right?
Moreover, in at least one permutation God created a universe that is fine tuned.
Thus, we have come full circle and we are back to logically and scientifically concluding that God exists and created this fine tuned universe.
Thus, in the mortal combat between the universe and the multiverse:
Universe: WINNER!!!