Why There is Almost Certainly A Multiverse

There has been a lot of debate about just how and why our universe seems so "fine tuned" for life. That is, there are certain constants of physics that must be a certain value or else life is impossible. Of course, theists have seized this as evidence of god. Other, perhaps more imaginative people, have speculated that there are many universes, and of course with trillions of universes (or an infinite number of universes) one would eventually come about that could support life. I thought of both of these as pure speculation until now.

As some of you may know, I argue that the universe started from nothingness:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzEhC9iAbeE

Of course, outside the space of our universe is an infinite amount of nothingness (an infinite amount of nothingness must exist by definition) and therefore there is an infinite number of universes. Even if the creation of universes is extremely rare, there must still be an infinite number of them. And by the way, I suspect it is rare: I think it comes about by a statistically improbable concentration of quantum fluctuations.

My hypothesis about the Evolution of Morality

Here is my explanation of morality, which I believe is a slight variant of Dawkins' selfish gene explanation of altruism:

Studies have shown that when you see someone else in pain, your brain responds as if it were in pain*. You see someone in pain, and it reminds you of your pain, and your brain reacts accordingly. In a situation where you are near them, you will react to try and relieve their pain (to relieve your own). I hypothesize that this is either a byproduct of the brain and of remembrance which just happens to be beneficial was not altered, or that it evolved by a selective advantage for groups with at least one altruistic individual (having at least one who rescues others from pain or death is still advantageous).

The Ultimate Argument Against Christianity

Has anyone read this? Check out the NPR interview:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=19096131

I think that the Bible's 'explanations' for suffering, as well as common christian explanations like Free Will, fail because the bible teaches in its first three chapters that we had a perfect world to begin with. According to Genesis, in the beginning suffering was not redemptive or necessary to feel pleasure. There are indications that man did not have evil in his soul (Genesis 3:6-7, the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil was good for gaining wisdom, and after they had eaten, "their eyes were opened"). We now come upon a contradiction. If eating the fruit was evil, then they should not have had it in their hearts to do evil. If it was not evil, they (and us, their "seeds") should not have been punished for doing no wrong. Christians must conclude that we suffer because of a remote ancestor's sin. Fair and Loving, Huh? Christians may argue that we would have done the same thing if we were in the garden of Eden, so this is why we were never given a perfect world to begin with. But don't we have free will? Since we are innocent to begin with (having done no wrong before we are born), why are we not given what we deserve (a perfect world)?