View Full Version : Science's Alternative to an Intelligent Creator: the Multiverse Theory

11-11-2008, 10:04 PM
Our universe is perfectly tailored for life. That may be the work of God or the result of our universe being one of many.

If the multiverse is the final stage of the Copernican revolution, with our universe but a speck in an infinite megacosmos, where does humanity fit in? If the life-friendly fine-tuning of our universe is just a chance occurrence, something that inevitably arises in an endless array of universes, is there any need for a fine-tuner—for a god?

“I don’t think that the multiverse idea destroys the possibility of an intelligent, benevolent creator,” Weinberg says. “What it does is remove one of the arguments for it, just as Darwin’s theory of evolution made it unnecessary to appeal to a benevolent designer to understand how life developed with such remarkable abilities to survive and breed.”

On the other hand, if there is no multiverse, where does that leave physicists? “If there is only one universe,” Carr says, “you might have to have a fine-tuner. If you don’t want God, you’d better have a multiverse.”

This is a very interesting article. It's kinda long, but worth your time, imo. As a theist, I find it fascinating and inspiring how more and more scientific discoveries confirms the possibility of a God.

Science's Alternative to an Intelligent Creator: the Multiverse Theory | Cosmology | DISCOVER Magazine (

PS: Not sure where to put this thread, so mods feel free to place it where you wish.

11-12-2008, 12:38 PM
I've always thought there was plenty of room for both science and religion to coexist. They are NOT mutually exclusive to one another. I and a Methodist at heart, but I still keep very scientific views on the world. I'm a believer of evolution, but that doesnt mean that I don't have faith. I won't go into my view on sense in stirring that up, but I think we all need to be open to other ideas.