Topic: Scientific proof that God exists? - page 143. (Read 845582 times)

So what is the hypothesis of god then?

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/about-us/136-physics/general-physics/thermodynamics/816-does-evolution-contradict-the-second-law-of-thermodynamics-intermediate

There is no law of biogenesis saying that very primitive life cannot form from increasingly complex molecules.

The Hardy-Weinberg principle connects the work of Mendel and Darwin, and builds on them to expand our understanding of evolution

You think there is such a thing like a spontaneous generation? Like a mage creating a cat from nothing, or what do you mean?

I don't know how the law of information systems disproves evolution

http://www.proof-of-evolution.com/specified-complexity.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specified_complexity

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Irreducible_complexity
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB200.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CI/CI102.html

http://answers-in-reason.com/religion/mathematical-impossibility-evolution-debunked/
http://experimentalmath.info/blog/2012/01/does-probability-refute-evolution/

Natural law?

How does a beneficial mutation disprove evolution?

I don't know what generic complexity specifically is but I already showed how complexity does not disprove evolution

http://www.sciencemeetsreligion.org/evolution/information-theory.php

And you should understand that there is no scientific theory that is proven right. There are thoeries that are not proven wrong. You can not have certainity with any thoery that its true. Thats not science.



There are not yet enough of hypothesis builded up to make a scientific theory of God. But many of the thesis in the books are not proven to be wrong.

Scientists, even those from evolution and big bang or whatever are validating a God thesis (the bible). Scientific theory is based on making a right hypothesis and try to prove its wrong. Its doable to prove its wrong. You have the God thesis that you can easily make into hypothesis, that are falisifiable. The more they try to prove the God thesis is wrong, and they fail to do so, the stronger its validity is.

That is called validating by trying to falsify something. You validate God by falsifying your atheistic possitions that are the opposite. Its like saying - that man is not dead, therefore he is alive.

So thank you for proving God.

A lot of talk but still no proof or evidence presented, even if evolution is wrong, the big bang is wrong and everything else is wrong it still doesn't prove god is right. You should understand that.

You can not be surprised that people does not take parapsychology as science. It had been proven hoax to many time for people to give credit for.

Thats why people will not treat you seriously - because of early XX century and many charlatains that cheated people blind. By the way, the Bible had forbidden witchcraft of necromancy, of speaking, dealing and invoking spirits. So I am not sure how do you prove God by proving things he forbidden but nevermind.


That words are so hypocritical coming from you.

You yourself are the proof of God existance. He told that he will send strong delusions.

Evolutionist claims that the Bible does not say the truth, yet every birth on this earth, by any living creature is a proof of his word. Evolutionist had found none proof to the contrary.

How you judge you will be judged the same. Do you think the God is laughable? God will have the last laugh, if he decided that.

You are laughable, when God allowed you to discover that human is closest in dna similiarities with the pig.  Hows your theory can explain that? It can not - you have strong delusions and are made a joke.



You say everything is driven by matter, every reaction is mass related. God has send strong delusions on you, becuase your scientific equations are full of patches, constants that "must be" because your equations would not be right. Some miracle made believe constants. You are all so much believing in your mass driven world that you will believe and create lies to hide it. Like different constant of the speed of light every 20 years or so. And that not within a statistical error of 5%, but its multitude of quantity. So it was not an error.

God can have a good laugh when your equations is wrong by 95% percent of mass (or more) you have to invent, like stupid dark matter and dark energy, that noone had ever seen for your equations to be even remotely true.

Yes you nitpick on electric universe theory that they made some slight error.... You have a strong delusion because your whole mass driven world is 95% false and only 5% correct. Even after a whole book of patches how to make wrong theory right.

You know what is 5% in statistic? Statistical error. Congratulations that your predictibility is so low as it can be a statistical error that you guessed wrong or right.

You believe more than anyone else on your things that noone ever had seen and noone ever will, yet you hypocriticly claim that someone else is not to be credited because they believe.



And then you hypocriticly says, that bible believers are a joke. Thats a very strong delusions there.

Think again if your claims is not just hypocritical hot air.

Skeptics have been known to ignore the evidence presented to them , I even posted 100 points of evidence here but received no adequate reply.

Nope, they really don't. I already showed you how:

Debunked by yourself: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.19455088

And debunked by me: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.19350390
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.19357376

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

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

Accept the truth.

^^^ Are there really any posts in this thread?     

A VERY  INTERESTING  CONVERSATION
 
An Atheist Professor of Philosophy was speaking to his Class on the Problem Science has with
GOD, the ALMIGHTY.  He asked one of his New Christian Students to stand and . . .     
 
Professor :    You are a Christian, aren't you, son ?
Student    :     Yes, sir.
 
Professor :    So, you Believe in GOD ?
Student    :     Absolutely, sir.
 
Professor :    Is GOD Good ?
Student    :     Sure.
 
Professor :    Is GOD ALL - POWERFUL ?
Student    :     Yes.
 
Professor :    My Brother died of Cancer even though he Prayed to  GOD to Heal him. Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill.                    But GOD didn't. How is this GOD good then? Hmm?
 
(Student was silent )
 
Professor :   You can't answer, can you ?  Let's start again, Young Fella.  Is GOD Good?
Student    :    Yes.
 
Professor :   Is Satan good ?
Student    :    No.
 
Professor :   Where does Satan come from ?
Student    :    From . . . GOD . . .
 
Professor :   That's right.  Tell me son, is there evil in this World?
Student    :    Yes.
 
Professor :   Evil is everywhere, isn't it ? And GOD did make everything. Correct?
Student    :   Yes.
 
Professor :   So who created evil ?
(Student did not answer)
 
Professor :  Is there Sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the World, don't they?
Student    :   Yes, sir.
 
Professor :  So, who Created them ?
(Student had no answer)
 
Professor : Science says you have 5 Senses you use to Identify and Observe the World around you. Tell me, son . . . Have you ever Seen GOD?
Student    :   No, sir.
 
Professor   :  Tell us if you have ever Heard your GOD?
Student    :     No , sir.
 
Professor :    Have you ever Felt your GOD, Tasted your GOD, Smelt your GOD?Have you ever had any Sensory Perception of GOD for that matter?
Student    :    No, sir. I'm afraid I haven't.
 
Professor :   Yet you still Believe in HIM?
Student    :    Yes.
 
Professor :  According to Empirical, Testable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says your GOD doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?
Student    :   Nothing.  I only have my Faith.
 
Professor :  Yes, Faith.  And that is the Problem Science has.

(Here, the student begins to shoot back the professor.)
 
Student    :   Professor, is there such a thing as Heat?
Professor :  Yes.
 
Student    :   And is there such a thing as Cold?
Professor  :  Yes.
 
Student   :    No, sir. There isn't.
 
(The Lecture Theatre became very quiet with this turn of events )
 
Student    :   Sir, you can have Lots of Heat, even More Heat, Superheat, Mega Heat, White Heat,a Little Heat or No Heat.  But we don't have anything called Cold. We can hit 458 Degrees below Zero which is No Heat, but we can't go any further after that.  There is no such thing as Cold. Cold is only a Word we use to describe the Absence of Heat. We cannot Measure Cold. Heat is Energy. Cold is Not the Opposite of Heat, sir, just the Absence of it.
 
(There was Pin-Drop Silence in the Lecture Theatre )
 
Student    :  What about Darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as Darkness?
Professor :  Yes. What is Night if there isn't Darkness?
 
Student    :  You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is the Absence of Something You can have Low Light,  Normal Light, Bright Light, Flashing Light . . .
But if you have No Light constantly, you have nothing and its called Darkness, isn't it? In reality, Darkness doesn't exist. If it does, would you be able to make Darkness Darker, wouldn't you?
Professor :   So what is the point you are making, Young Man ?
 
Student   :   Sir, my point is your Philosophical Premise is flawed.
Professor :   Flawed ? Can you explain how?
 
Student    :   Sir, you are working on the Premise of Duality.  You argue there is Life and then there is Death, a Good GOD and a Bad GOD. You are viewing the Concept of GOD as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, Science can't even explain a Thought. It uses Electricity and Magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view Death as the Opposite of Life is to be ignorant of the fact that Death cannot exist as a Substantive Thing. Death is Not the Opposite of Life: just the Absence of it.  Now tell me, Professor, do you teach your Students that they evolved from a Monkey?
Professor :   If you are referring to the Natural Evolutionary Process, yes, of course, I do.
 
Student    :   Have you ever observed Evolution with your own eyes, sir?
 
(The Professor shook his head with a Smile, beginning to realize where the Argument was going )   
 
Student    :  Since no one has ever observed the Process of Evolution at work and cannot even prove that this Process is an On-Going Endeavor,                 Are you not teaching your Opinion, sir? Are you not a Scientist but a Preacher?
 
(The Class was in Uproar )
 
Student    :  Is there anyone in the Class who has ever seen the Professor's Brain?
 
(The Class broke out into Laughter )
 
Student    :  Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor's Brain, Felt it, touched or Smelt it? . . . No one appears to have done so.   So, according to the Established Rules of Empirical, Stable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says that You have No Brain, sir.  With all due respect, sir, how do we then Trust your Lectures, sir?
 
(The Room was Silent. The Professor stared at the Student, his face unfathomable)
 
Professor :   I guess you'll have to take them on Faith, son.
Student    :  That is it sir . . .  Exactly ! The Link between Man & GOD is FAITH. That is all that Keeps Things Alive and Moving. 
That student was Albert Einstein.

Cause and effect is science. Complexity is used by science all over the place. Entropy is scientifically accepted.

Together these three things prove that God has to exist. God isn't a "maybe."

All your ''scientific'' arguments for the existence of god are simply circular logic arguments. That's all what religious nuts have. Science has disproved the god from the bible many many times.

Articles that try to debunk scientific proof for the existence of God, are simply circular logic arguments.

But that is all the anti-God scientists have. Scientific proof for God was shown way back at the time of Isaac Newton. It hasn't been debunked, ever. And the fact that it hasn't been debunked after hundreds of thousands of attempts to debunk it, proves that God science is stronger than ever.

Oh yea.. ''My proof of validity of God's word is that cow breed cow and thats what been and thats what will''
''Its not my fault that nowadays scientists are mainly a believers in mathematical scientism. There are many scientific evidences that gravity is electrical and we are living in the electric universe''

Your proofs are laughable at best.

http://neutrinodreaming.blogspot.com.es/2011/09/electric-universe-theory-debunked.html
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/18950/how-to-debunk-the-electric-universe

You can find a ton of articles debunking the pseudo science of the electric universe. Give me a break. You are just like badecker. All established science is wrong to you yet you use a ton of pseudo science to try to prove your points. you are a joke lmao.

The closest to the evolution "science" is the "science" of gender studies. They have their aplications as well. They have their langugae their 10th sexes and application how the 6th sex can feel sexy enough so that 7th won't offended. Just because something calls itself science and claim something does not mean its true.

Just because you use garbled pseudoscientific jargon that noone outside of guys that are interested in it understand does not mean its science. And the ones that are interested are the follow believers in evolution. Circular logic again.

All those applications are just hot air. I can't believe anyone is taking some of that circular logic seriously.

Evolution helps biology understand evolution. Are you sure thats implication rather than circular logic?

Selective breeding is not an evolution. Its just a selective breeding. Human are doing that for years. And if genetics are helping it, its not evolution science but genetic science.

Medicine. Again this article has mistake the science that is based on genetics with evolution. You know that I do not say that genes are not real? Do you? You cannot select genes based on evolution. If that would be the case the logical coclusion would be that we are the ancestors of pigs.

And yes micro evolution is not a macro evolution. I agree that micro evolution is factual. It does not prove that God is wrong or unnecessary

You cannot be serious about the evolution implication in IT. This is so stupid. I wonder who makes such an idiotic posts on wikipedia.


God had said that he set up a kinds that can breed with its kinds. Do you think that not keeping this usuful distinction of a specie - the only dychotomical sense of specie that it could have, that you will prove your point?

God had set up a rules. You have not made those rules obsolete. All you can do is mock them, play silly word games, pretend you do not understand, and play fools.

You are right. Thats dialog is offtopic. I had said my geographical, antropological, sociological, physical, biological and astrophysical observations in this topic. If you want to find them they are there. Bye.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applications_of_evolution
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA215.html

But lets not get too far ahead of ourselves, this thread is about proving god with science and you haven't done that.

Oh and there are examples of new species: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB910.html

Like what?


If not puritans you would not have science, just silly alchemist talk of balance and shit. Just because I am a believer, does not mean I do not know a science. I know muuuuuuuch more about science than you do. Evolution is not science.

I do not believe in miracles ok? Im not a catholic. I think there are some things we do not understand yet, but they could be explained scientificly. Placebo is a healing by faith. Even medicine admits the faith heals - its the placebo effect. There are a lot of things especially in medicine the doctors have no idea about.


Bible is antimystical.


Oh give me a break... And atheist are praying if they are dying. What is your point. People are doing things out of fear. Someone fear that they might die - they go to hospital. If they know they will die they ask for priest.

I advise you to read the book medical nemesis by I. Illich. Do not worry he was a former catholic priest and an atheist, he was not a believer. The guy had balls. He was not medicated for cancer at age 57 and he had died peacefully cancerless at the age 76 proving his point. Medicine would have killed him.

You should know that medicine had killed a lot more people than it is claimed, and a lot more people than it cured.

You have not explained why science has anything to do with religion. I had explained that if not a particular religion, you probably would not have science in the first place.

Give me just one explanation why you think science and religions are one or another(being exclusive) and not a separate entities like I claim they are.

You have a complete blackout in public education of information, that anything good has come out of reformation in church, while everything that was good came out of it. Counter reformation (jesuits) would make you think its everything else but the reformation that is good. They lie.

If not the reformation movement aka Puritans and Hussites, that was backed by the Bible, you could not even claim you are an atheist in public. Catholic church (the antichristos the word anti means replacing not the opposite) would have pierced your eyes and boiled you alive.

Every non christian religion would kill you where you stand, or torture you first if you would claim anything bad about them. You can be an atheist because of Christ mercy. Think about it.

Of course, you say scientists believe in creationism but they don't say it, they do, there are a few but that's it. Scientists understand evolution and use it. There are plenty of applications for it. You live in a magic world. Religion, god, they are all useless. No applications, no real life implications just mystical talk. As I said, religious people go to hospitals instead of praying, what does that say?

To have a grand you have to be compliant. Its such a world, that if you would not agree with someone, that make you say you believe in something, otherwise you are finished. What you would do if they would destroy your career, if you would say you believe in evolution if creationism would be the only game in town? If some scientist would say they believe in creation, smithsonians would destroy their life. No wonder scientists are silent about their believes.

Its a world where, if scientist have an enemy, this enemy, or enemies can easily destroy his life. Its very bad climate for truth. Its no wonder scientists does not want to make enemies and are deeply compliant.

You should think about it - this world is of satan. There are frauds upon frauds upon frauds upon hipocrisy with a cherry of idiocy on top of it. Do you not feel something is wrong with the world? Does the world not disgust you?

If liars have no arguments they start to discourage people by making people think they are just a minority. Pasteur was a minority as well when he was making his statements about the child deaths in hospitals.

The truth is the truth. It does not mean nothing to me if truth is in minority or if its in majority. Not at all.


Not so. Not even 25% of religious people takes Bible literally. I would say not even 5% religious people had read their bible, so what do they have to take literally? They are not aware of anything. More than 50% of christians are catholics, and catholic church aprove evolution.

Why 99.9% Adulterers and liars are against God? Think about that for a second.

Yeah, that's why virtually all scientists that use science agree with evolution because science disproves evolution, right? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution
http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_proof.htm

Why is it that 99.9% of people that are against evolution are also religious? Think about that for a second.

Its an example of natural selection and in the best case micro evolution (within a specie). I don't deny that is a fact. What I argue is that macro evolution is proven false.

Are you imply that peppered moth that is white is different specie than black? Are you stoned or something?



Even if those silly evolutionist claim something is different specie - Thats a phony definition of specie. Before the XX century everyone had used the word specie as a kind.

A kind is an organism that can reproduce within its kind.

I totally agree there can be varieties within a kind. I have told you many examples how evolution is stupid and how science disprove its claims, what you can only do, is to play a silly word games with me.

You are hopeless... End of subject.

The peppered moth was an example of evolution that we actually observed: http://www.mothscount.org/text/63/peppered_moth_and_natural_selection.html