Fine tuning: a discussion for the rest of us mortals

The fine tuning argument can be rebuffed from the single stand point of what it is fine tuned for ..from observation the universer is fine tuned to produces hydrogen atoms .. have you seen how many there are ?????? its unreally ..no thats silly its tine tuned to make water good old H20 ... no thats silly .. why water ...no its tuned to make life . .. see now thats a good reason right .. because ...err umm ...no its fine tuned to make computers .. yes thats it all comes together now ..H to H20 to life to humans to computers .....the XBOX is the reason for the universe ... every thing is so carefully tuned so that the end product comes into being ...The XBOX ....Please anywhere in my logic chain find a fault .. if there is fine tuning its for a reason .. with out the universe being as it is no XBOX's

no you do not need infinite numbers of universes , you do not need fine tuning , you do not need a designer ..what you need is the history of the universe to be as it is ... every random event has to have happened in the way it did .. then you get to this point .... it no longer matters that the chance of this sequence happening being so unlikly as to appear impossible .. it has happened and we are living in the proof .. that is what happened ... from todays view the universe is fine tuned for x box's , .. but at what point did that become clear .. hmm in 250bc ,1066 ad , 1556 ad 1901 ad , 1999 ad or when the dinosaurs where the dominate type of creature ?? ...there is nothing mysterious about whty we fit so well into the universe .. we are part of it .. nothing that we are made of is odd or rare in the universe .. there are no strangle cubes floating in space producing the element Qq.. that element that is vital but only reacts in humans .. we share every component in comman with the rocks ice's gases stars clouds across the universe ...where is the specfic fine tuning just for us ?? this planet is not idea for us .. vast area to hot , hot cold , to wet to dry , to high , to much volcanic activite , areas that after a few years will no longer grow you food crops , vast numbers of hotile and leathal organisms , solar radiation and flares , lumps of rock and ice falling on us , finite resorces , a star which will run out of fuel in the same universe where you are limited by the speed of light so travel to another star is going to take ages ....look at the evidence and we are clining on dispite the universe rather than it supporting us .....

Quote"You have a lot to learn about this universe" ... by what measure ?? i know all i need to know to exsist ..Quote "I'm not so interested in the Earth being compatible with life; rather the universe being compatible with stars and planets. This requires knowing why G and alpha have the values they do. "so what you are really saying is you are looking for a reason for the universe .. you are assuming it has a reason beyond being itself ...on what basis are you making your assumption of that there is a reason ?? what part of reality are you unsatisfied with that creates this need ??Ok so if G was less there would be no stars .. interesting fact but irreverent .. you might as well say if gods exsisted and one of them feed on stars there would be no stars ... you are dealing with things that are Hypothetical , you might as well say .. how odd the universe is so fine tuned that France lost the Napoleonic wars .. how was that achived .. if the French had delt with Spain before invading Russia the universe would be different ... true but its not the case ..In your universe with a lower value of G with no stars would the universe exsist ?? yes .. and would not a observer marvel at the fine tuning to get just the right density of gas clouds so as to produce feli ( feli being the equiviltent of life ) gosh good job the value of G isnt a bit higher or all those usfull elements would be locked up in great balls of fire and harmful radiation , im sure glad we alive in a universe where atoms float free and as easly access other wise feli ( or YBox's)could not exsist .....

right , i think is see your vantage point now , you are not interested in say "oh that's the way it is" no lets explore and exprience what is ..you want to step outside of what is ..and ask why did we get to the point we are at ...
you would like to run time backwards and re run the universe to see if things took a different course would we get to the same point ,as we are now, everi assume that you hold a view that there was scope at the start of the universe ( assuming it has one ) for the Laws and constants governing it to have the option of being different .is it fair to say that you would not be satisfied by the answer that by chance this is the way the universe turned out ..out of all the possiblites we got this one , ?do you know what sort of answer you are looking for ??

cavediver says
quote "I would like to get to a point of seeing the universe "as is" as wholly necessary"
AND
"But yes, I don't think we got these laws and this type of universe by chance. I think it was necessary."twice you use the word .. necessary .. but necessary for what ??and why stay clear of religious overtones , if that is where you seem to be going ? will you discard a route because it is not the one you want ?with no wish to put words in your mouth .. but you seem to be looking for a meaning as to why we , conciousness , exsists .. and clearly are not satisfied by the answer it just happens ... even if we are unique does it follow that we are important in any way at all ??and echoing Sidelined and Shh please expand the pros / cons/

cavediver .. thank you for taking the time to , and i must say given the nature of the beast , very clearly explain your ..might i say .. quest for the ultimate question ( sorry big HHGttG fan ).you have set yourself a very high target , way way beyond my mathematical lingustic skills , good luckwhen you get there drop us mortals a line , and a few hints please ..one last question .. taking your mandelbort example .. do you see infinites involed with in the system ( the universe ), or infinites of systems not as possiblities , but as soltuons to the equation .