In today’s episode of the Truth Wanted, Objectivity Dan and Dr. Blitz, slow a star down to drive it towards another star to avoid the word salad bar in this universe that is still not fine tuned. 

Steve in NE cites a paper The Spider Stellar Engine: a Fully Steerable Extraterrestrial Design? https://ress.at/news_uploads/2411.05038v1.pdf This describes a nearby star with some spectroscopic signals that show the star is decelerating where one explanation is extraterrestrial design. What other solutions could there be for this star slowing down? Who says these are artificially generated? Whenever there are claims with, “probably” we need to be careful. We need several pieces of data that point to the same thing. The discussion continues with a different claim of wreckage material that has a date older than our solar system. Why are you convinced these claims are true and why would you believe his own counter arguments to the criticisms? If you start with the conclusion, you will always find some stuff. Whether that stuff supports your conclusion is a different story. 

Catholic Traditionalist (CT) wants to talk about ontological intelligibility where god is defined as an intelligent agent that has no beginning. We might have a basic understanding of how things work, but how do we get to god from that? What does it mean to understand things on a basic level? People perceive things without understanding them all the time. If we have this agreed upon definition of understanding what is around us, what next? Do properties exist on their own or are there features of minds interacting with things on the ontological status? CT fails at his attempt to put the hosts in a different world by comparing their perception to “other atheists”. If you claim to speak with hundreds of atheists online, why doesn’t your script cover nominalism? Your projection of word salad is hilarious and if you are going to use words like “ontological” you need to know what nominalism is. 

Gregory in TN asks Dr. Blitz about the fine tuning argument that we get all the time and whether it is a non-starter or if we should try to take it apart. Dr. Blitz describes how this argument has at least two problems: 1. We must first know how the universe could have been and we can’t evaluate this probability. 2. From a theist’s point of view, the assumption must be made that not only god exists, but this god must want life to exist. How can we determine the likelihood of parameters if we don’t know the likelihood or the parameters? How fine tuned are god’s desires and why is his will so fine tuned?

Thank you for tuning in this week! AJ, our backup host, joins us to close out the show. Prompt of the week is: Combine two conspiracy theories to make the ultimate conspiracy theory. 

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/truth-wanted--3195473/support.