Talk:Fine-tuning argument
(Difference between revisions)
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
This content needs to be merged/added to the existing article: [[Anthropic principle]] -- [[User:Sans Deity|Sans Deity]] 15:03, 11 October 2006 (CDT) | This content needs to be merged/added to the existing article: [[Anthropic principle]] -- [[User:Sans Deity|Sans Deity]] 15:03, 11 October 2006 (CDT) | ||
* I just now noticed this, and second your comment. Should the official article be under AP, or FTA? --[[User:Kazim|Kazim]] 17:15, 18 June 2008 (CDT) | * I just now noticed this, and second your comment. Should the official article be under AP, or FTA? --[[User:Kazim|Kazim]] 17:15, 18 June 2008 (CDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | *"The argument of fine tuning is a rather new one. It has only came to be in the last ''eight to ten years''" | ||
| + | |||
| + | Can we change the relative age to a most permanent one like ' It has appeared in the latter part of the 1990's' ? I'd do it myself, but I don't have the information and I am unsure of when the actual appearance of the argument is.[[User:Cafeeine|Cafeeine]] 03:20, 29 April 2009 (CDT) | ||
Revision as of 03:20, 29 April 2009
This content needs to be merged/added to the existing article: Anthropic principle -- Sans Deity 15:03, 11 October 2006 (CDT)
- I just now noticed this, and second your comment. Should the official article be under AP, or FTA? --Kazim 17:15, 18 June 2008 (CDT)
- "The argument of fine tuning is a rather new one. It has only came to be in the last eight to ten years"
Can we change the relative age to a most permanent one like ' It has appeared in the latter part of the 1990's' ? I'd do it myself, but I don't have the information and I am unsure of when the actual appearance of the argument is.Cafeeine 03:20, 29 April 2009 (CDT)
