In the God Delusion RD briefly brings up the idea of multiverse or oscillating universe while spending more time explaining away the idea of a first mover with improbability. You may recall: life is improbable but god then would be far more improbable. I'm rather inclined to throw an argument 'multiverse' into the philosophy drawer while thermodynamics discard an oscillating universe. There is no way, yet at least, to prove there is a multiverse (aside through the musings of theoretical physicists), or for that matter string theory. We should, for the moment, put all of those things in a philosophy drawer until we devise a way to test them empirically. With that in mind, can we say that a multiverse or string theory is as concrete as trying to prove a first mover? Surely, all things must have a root? I consider myself a deist, wholly convinced nothing good comes of religion. RD likewise considered himself an almost assured atheist (6.7 out of 7 if I'm not mistaken) and even said in his debate with John Lennox he could see a reasonable case being made for an Einsteinian god (the mathematician). I suppose I wonder if the atheist movement has more to do with the progress of humanism and secularism instead of trying to disprove a god?