Topic: Scientific proof that God exists? - page 109. (Read 845582 times)

Literally nothing you just said even attempted to address my points. Perhaps you need to read my post again and actually respond to what I'm saying, in a concise manner.

Edit: I'll break it down in the following post if you want, as you seem confused.

Philosophers might have all kinds of philosophical explanations for things that science has proof for. That's a kinda backward idea you have there.


That's because their great minds are far too inadequate for analyzing something as great as God is.

Many witnesses of the past have been subject to the the strength of God. A few of them have written down what they witnessed in the Bible. Other religious books have writings of witnesses to God's power.

Many people today experience God's power and "moving" in their lives.


God made the laws of physics. He didn't make the physics of this universe to be something that contains all possible laws. Because of this, He can mover through the universe using other laws, and even things that are not laws. After all, the garage builder is within and without the garage He is building, but He is never part of it.

Consider outer space... or empty space in general. You can prove it exists by observing the way material and energy act within it. But you can't prove emptiness or nothing by analyzing it directly. God is proven in the same way. "Nothing" is not the source of everything; God is.


Sounds like you are using the scientific method in the way you want to use it, rather than the way that it works with everything.


Did Isaac Newton have peer reviewed papers? Scientists use complexity all the time in their scientific examination, but do they have peer reviewed papers for complexity? If they have these papers, get them out and read them. They prove God exists.



As you said. You are blind. Just because you think you are an atheist almost literally proves it.

I've commented in this thread before, but let me just again try and explain concisely why "Scientific proof that God exists" is philosophically impossible.

Firstly, if there is a god, then by definition it does not follow the same laws as the universe, as we know them. It must reside outside the laws of physics and science in general, because the god would have to have magical powers to do the things it is claimed it can do. Many philosophers, for thousands of years have pondered this question, and most, if not all of them are probably more intelligent than you or I. As far as I know, none of these great minds have found any scientific proof.

If the god does not follow the laws of physics that we observe in this universe, then it is logically impossible for there to be scientific proof that it exists, at least in this universe. You cannot scientifically prove the existence of an entity that does not follow the laws of known science. This is a logical fact.

Furthermore, if anyone claims that there is scientific proof of such an entity (I'm looking at you BADecker), then they are either deluded, or confused as to what the scientific method actually accomplishes.

If someone does wish to claim such a thing, I would ask that they provide irrefutable evidence in the form of peer-reviewed scientific papers, published in a reasonably reputable scientific journal (preferably in an academic journal, concerning physics, biology or chemistry).

I am an atheist myself, as I have not seen any compelling evidence for the existence of a god-entity/creator. If such evidence were to emerge, I would be happy to change my stance based on that evidence. Until then, I treat the existence of a god/creator as I would Russell's Teapot, or an invisible pink unicorn.

For Catholic, it doesn't need to have so called "proof" as long God is in your heart and you believed he exist.

The kind of science you use to rebut the proof for God isn't really science. It's just a bunch of people playing science-like games with their minds. Pure science is found in cause and effect, entropy, and complexity. Combining them as they are found in the universe is unrebuttable proof that God exists.

Nah, you just have been saying the same stuff because it's the easiest way to dismiss the science that shows your proof is nothing but garbage. You just want to call anything god for some reason even if what created the universe is the universe itself, for example, in your mind it's still god.

Well, you didn't really predict it. I have been showing it to you for a long time now.

Did I predict that or what? ''Oh no that's just circular reasoning''

Is that what you do when you see your ''science'' getting destroyed by simple logic?


https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.19455088

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.19350390
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.19357376

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.19355289

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.19666684

Your debunking debunks itself by circular logic, or incomplete logic, or by logic that doesn't really exist, or by statements that cannot be proven factual, and often they say, themselves, that they are not factual. Because of this, your "stuff" is the stuff of religion, not science. You constantly bring religion into this science thread. What's the matter? You like your religion better than the religion of reality - science?

I debunked your links several times, your answers are always the same ''Oh no that's just circular reasoning'' Maybe the devil has trapped you and you believe in the bible instead of the quran, who knows.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.19455088

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.19350390
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.19357376

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.19355289

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.19666684

Your deception/idiocy is showing. Or have you been able to track an electron lately? You know, like you tag a deer, and follow its travels through the woods? What? You haven't been able to track even one electron? And you so seriously think that you can understand the Source of all cause and effect enough to apply your logic to IT correctly!? LOL!

Why, you can't even remain on topic. Consider your post in the Health and Religion thread at https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.22320497:
Wrong thread for that, buddy. In fact, you use reverse logic. In the face of the scientific proof that God exists, you assume that He doesn't exist. And then you go and stick it in the wrong thread. You are falling apart, and your logic and ideals right along with you.

I'm sorry. I shouldn't laugh at you like I do now and again. The devil has you trapped in a false religion, and you constantly show it. So, (without continued laughing) I offer you the admonition to re-evaluate science so that you can understand that all of the universe and nature prove that God exists.

Are you stupid? God can be in the universe but he couldn't have been part of it before creating it. It doesn't matter if he can get in and out, he won't apply to the entropy of the universe. I can't be inside the house if I haven't built it yet.

I believe in God

No. That is why you do not understand God. God is not a platonic concept. It is not idea that is outside of the world. He is in the world and you can see his influence on the individuals and society. You need to first abandon the idea that the God is the idea.

Many people all around the world see the hand of God that saves them. They feel it because everything was going the other way and there was "some" action that makes everything go some other way. It is the rod and staff of our heavenly sheepherd.

That is the reason why people even have the concept of neoatheism(original materialistic point of view was discredited scientificly that is why you are not believing the original form of atheism). That is because of the neoplatonic influence saying the God is somehow outside and visible by miracles only. If you define God that way being atheist is rational.

But Platon, who was introduced into christianity by satanic influence of catholicism, had made the large part of the world Godless.

Epicurean atheism was changed into neoplatonic atheism.

first of all, you have to provide a definition of god, then we can talk about proofs.

It's obvious to Me that heaven is in the Mariana Trench, almost 11km down.  The only part of earth We have not explored.

Dozens of gods are the things mankind created. God never wanted mankind to do this.

Now that mankind suggests that God doesn't exist, what man is really doing is trying to make himself into God, simply by thinking he has the ability to find some other way for the universe to exist than through God.

Your logic about God isn't good enough to suggest anything about God other than what simple nature and science shows us. Consider. When you build a house, you are within it some of the time, and outside it part of the time. But God can't do this with the universe? You talk so silly.

Or could it be god is crazy enough where he created his own universe much as a person who suffer schizophrenia who created his own world full of characters of his own as well which is why there are tons of gods, benevolent gods so they say.

There is no doubt that a modern human is far far more intelligent than a homo habilis, for example. If god made the universe he had to be outside it otherwise he couldn't have made it. You can't be part of the universe and then create the universe because that would mean the universe was already created, it's pretty simple logic.