Topic: Scientific proof that God exists? - page 113. (Read 845834 times)

Once again ... the question here is SCIENTIFIC PROOF! Space was already explored and analyzed. We know exactly what out space is made of. And before we had rockets etc. we couldn't explain outer space completely, but we knew it was there because we could at least see it. And although no one is going every to the Sun ...  we still know it is there... because we can see it and put it in perspective.

You can't scientific prove god because you can't see or measure him. Just because someone said, that there is a god, doesn't mean there must be one. If I would tell you that I have an invisible toaster, would you believe me? Would you just take my word, because I said so? There is also no scientific proof for that.

The point wasn't outer space. The point had to do with science.

Very few people can PROVE that outer space exists. The average person only has the ability to listen to what others say about outer space. Sure, he can look at the stars, but what are they? Even the ISS isn't beyond that Van Allen belts, and is, therefore, not in outer space.

God, on the other hand, can be proven by multitudes of  people all over the place. Cause and effect is used by all the people all the time. And all they need to do is think about it to see that this is true.

Simple forms of entropy exist all over the place. The fact of old age is a simple form of entropy. Everyone understands entropy.

Complexity in the world is by far the most evident of the three. Any child can understand complexity.

Put these three together with a little thought, and they prove that God exists.

When scientists and wise people put these three together, they can't help but see that God exists.

But nobody knows what that is up there without building rockets to go and see. People might have all kinds of theories that it is outer space, but without the rockets, they could never prove it.

Regarding outer space, your average, everyday person doesn't know what it is without somebody telling him. But your average, everyday person can prove that God exists with all kinds of stuff that he uses daily.

the telekinesis nonsense is still being discussed?  Oh good lord!! . face palm
your link was a good laugh.
 look up the definition of gullible...
ya know, if I were a con artist, you would be my first mark...

Psychokinesis experiments have historically been criticized for lack of proper controls and repeatability. There is no convincing evidence that psychokinesis is a real phenomenon, and the topic is generally regarded as pseudoscience.
There is a broad scientific consensus that PK research, and parapsychology more generally, have not produced a reliable, repeatable demonstration.

A panel commissioned in 1988 by the United States National Research Council to study paranormal claims concluded that "despite a 130-year record of scientific research on such matters, our committee could find no scientific justification for the existence of phenomena such as extrasensory perception, mental telepathy or ‘mind over matter’ exercises... Evaluation of a large body of the best available evidence simply does not support the contention that these phenomena exist.

There is no such thing as telekinesis and I don't know why you guys want to believe in magic so badly, you are going to die in 50 years and you will realize that magic did not affect your life whatsoever.

In this thread: "skeptics" have no problem being critical of others' beliefs while neglecting to examine their own.

What?? Badecker doesn't believe in outer space??

Troll?   Troll.

So think about where your god came from.  Nothing?

Hmm, I don't have proof that God exists. But I disagree about the idea of life that come out of nothing. Isn't it strange to us that life is come out of atom and some particel ? What is the purpose of our lifes ? Are we going to eat, sleep, go to work and die ? Is there something beyond our death ? So I believe there are an explaination to all of those questions. I believe that God exists and create human, with a purpose.

I must be sad and pathetic in your fairy tale. 

So you don't believe in ignore. Do you happen to be in the same funny farm as noWmad13666?

Such a thing I have never done. After all, if you don't like something that I post, you have the ability to place me on ignore. Or haven't you figured that out yet?

As long as you don't push your fairy tale on others. 

No astronaut ever grabbed a bunch of outer space and analyzed it. Extremely few have even been to outer space. The ISS is not in outer space.

Every astronaut is a liar in your fairy tale.  :/

There is no such thing as outer space. Sure, we see something. But we can't put our hands on it to test if it really exists, right?

Cause and effect, entropy, and complexity combined prove that God exists.

There is no such thing as scientific proof for God because science needs testability and falsifiability. Science can only deal with what is perceivable by the senses, that is, with matter. God is not composed of matter and thus you can't scientifically study God. But keep in mind, there is no scientific proof for science either. All of science rests on philosophical axioms and once we bring philosophy into the picture, we can provide proof for God's existence.  

i read a sentence yesterday in curch. its like ''my only knowledge is i don't know anything except jesus paid our sins with his life'' it was antiscientic. in my opinion you cant proof god with science and cant proof science with god. one day people will find all answers of questions. and they will say god is who knows everything, than im god

I don't think there is enough scientific knowledge about the Creator that science shows, to definitely say that He/It is NOT the God of one or more of the religions. Certainly, the God of the Bible contains all the characteristics of the Being that science shows. The difference is that the God of the Bible shows a lot more things about God than science does about the Creator that it shows. Why is that so? Because science hasn't advanced to the point where it understands much of anything about God, and because God has revealed Himself to people through religion and other means. To say much more would be getting into religion.

Be all that as it may, the word "God" still fits what we see in science in at least some important aspects of the meaning of "God." So, the scientific proof stands even if many or most of the religious gods/Gods are somewhat lacking or somewhat beyond science in various ways.

As I said, anything complex enough, by your definition and proof, could be the creator of the universe. There is no point in calling it a god. This thread was started by a religious person and his god was the christian god just like yours. I agree that a powerful being could be the creator of the universe (could) but even if he is, he definitely is not any of the gods in any of the religions we have. He is not a personal god, he doesn't look after us, he doesn't care about us. So it really doesn't matter, at least not now.