Atheistic Multiverses Can't Explain Fine-Tuning

A new problem for the multiverse

For the past many years I’ve been of the position that a multiverse is the only hope for an atheist to explain fine-tuning. They can do a few other things to mildly chip away at the force of fine-tuning—like noting that theism doesn’t actually guarantee fine-tuning. But all of that is wildly insufficient because unless atheists have a better explanation of fine-tuning, they have to simply take the hit on a roughly googol to one update against their theory.

No one should ever take the hit on a googol to one update against their view! If some fact has any ghostly sliver of a chance on an alternative view but has odds of one in googol on your theory, you should drop your theory in an instant! Don’t take the hit on a 10^N update against your view if N is more than, say, 5.

Now, for reasons I’ve given before, I don’t think the multiverse takes very much force out of the core fine-tuning argument. While it’s by far the best explanation, it’s still riddled with problems. It can’t explain fine-tuning for discoverability, risks just kicking fine-tuning up a level, and struggles with Boltzmann brains.

But I’ve recently thought of a problem with the multiverse theory that strikes me as extremely decisive. Unless I’m missing something, this seems like the death blow of the multiverse as an alternative explanation of fine-tuning.