Contest Question 1: Does the multiverse help science make sense - or simply destroy science?

This is Contest Question 1 for Earn Free Stuff at Uncommon Descent: Does the multiverse help science make sense - or simply destroy science?

(Note: You must comment at Uncommon Descent. For legal reasons, I cannot allow comments here.)

To help you decide, here's a classic pop science article by Anil Ananthaswamy of New Scientist, fronting the multiverse:

Today's measurements show the universe to be flat, but the uncertainty in those measurements still leaves room for space-time to be slightly curved - either like a saddle (negatively curved) or like a sphere (positively curved). "If we originated from a tunnelling event from an ancestor vacuum, the bet would be that the universe is negatively curved," says Susskind. "If it turns out to be positively curved, we'd be very confused. That would be a setback for these ideas, no question about it."

Until any such setback the smart money will remain with the multiverse and string theory. "It has the best chance of anything we know to be right," Weinberg says of string theory. "There's an old joke about a gambler playing a game of poker," he adds. "His friend says, 'Don't you know this game is crooked, and you are bound to lose?' The gambler says, 'Yes, but what can I do, it's the only game in town.' We don't know if we are bound to lose, but even if we suspect we may, it is the only game in town."

Question: For a free copy of Expelled, is this any way to do science?

Find out why there is an intelligent design controversy: