I am thinking about how the idea of something does not mean it actually exist. When someone say for instance, do you believe in god? I understand to a certain extent what they mean by god, but at the same time if someone ask me if you believe in unicorns? I understand what they mean, but this in no way means that a unicorn actually exist nor for that matter, does this means a god exist. In other words, just because you understand the idea of something does not mean it exist. Also, I was listening to a presuppositionalist on The Thinking Atheist podcast, and the only comment I would say to a presuppositionalist is; I agree we all start off with a preconceived notion of something, but what happens if what you're presupposing is false, you're stuck. However at least with science, if whatever I am presupposing is not backed up with observation or others cannot duplicate my hypothesis then I have to accept that I could be wrong and have to look for another explanation that matches or best explains what we observe. I finally get why the fine tuning argument is an ultimate failure of an explanation for the existence of god. My refutation of the fine tuning argument is called the lottery, in a universe with billions of billions of galaxies, solar systems, stars and planets, I would find it more improbable that none of them would have life. For example, someone in the United States even with odds of 1 to 330,000,000 eventually hits the lottery (a matter of fact in the recent Mega Millions 640 million jackpot three states had a winner), thus with billions of galaxies, solar systems, suns, and planets eventually you will find one with life, because here I am thinking and writing about it, and I feel like I hit the lottery, if one thinks about the probability of even being borne, it seems improbable but yet I am here and it does not mean it was fine tune, but means we happen to hit the jackpot in a universe that has a lot of lotto balls. Think about it.
