Topic: Scientific proof that God exists? - page 184. (Read 845582 times)

It is an old but good link because right in the OP it says that there is "nothing to suggest any fraud was committed" for this case! Skeptics never provided any evidence to support their beliefs about what happened in the Eisenbeiss case. These are pitiful arguments from pseudo-skeptics who often think they have no burden of proof.

Some skeptics want to claim that Eisenbeiss was responsible for the hoax, this is also nonsense; there is no evidence for this claim whatsoever. Those arguing against the possibility of survival are simply refusing consider the possibility of new paradigms, they also fail to consider the entire body of circumstantial evidence supporting the possibility of survival.

The test in this case was to see whether or not the medium could contact the prior personality and relay the information to Eisenbeiss. The accuracy of the information and the chess game has been established; you should look at the references in the AECES paper for more details, note that some of the links can only be accessed through archive.org.

The realistic portrayal of the chess player by the medium is analogous to the "Events witnessed and heard by NDErs while in an out-of-body state [which] are almost always realistic. When the NDEr or others later seek to verify what was witnessed or heard during the NDE, their OBE observations are almost always confirmed as completely accurate. Even if the OBE observations include events occurring far away from the physical body, and far from any possible sensory awareness of the NDEr, the OBE observations are still almost always confirmed as completely accurate. This fact alone rules out the possibility that NDEs are related to any known brain functioning or sensory awareness. This also refutes the possibility that NDEs are unrealistic fragments of memory from the brain."
http://www.near-death.com/science/evidence.html#a32

This thread is a great example of skeptical misdirection. Show me some hard evidence, please!

Skeptics use misdirection and fallacious reasoning in order to deny the truth of survival:
https://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8pt/skeptical_fallacies
https://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8pt/skeptical_misdirection

I commend you jokers^^^, doing the best you can to downplay and diminish the scientific proof that God exists. But in it all, no proof rebuttal. You just can't do it, can you?

 

We have not been disappointed and we have material for episode 12 of 'The comeback of the retard as we knew him'. Of course his aggressive episode was a short one and we were actually considering him far more superior than he is by thinking he would have an evil plan. He doesn, he is simply as stupid as scientific laws allow it and tends to defy them by going even lower. This is strong evidence that Badecker is indeed a complete retard, a human being so stupid that scientists should open his skull, get the brain (or whatever shit he has in there) out and research on it. We might have found the missing link, the primitive idiot in the 21 century. First of all, our retard came back claiming that 'simply stating there is no proof doesn't make it so'. Well, no not always, but in this particular case it does and there is nothing he can do about it except for acting like a guy who has a piece of shit hanging from his beard while everyone tells him about it and he denies it. It's not really his choice, as much as he fights it. There is actually no proof in his shit links and anything he says, it's not his choice, in this case it really is the truth and he is overwhelmed by a majority.  The shit is on his face whether he likes it or not. That is how truth acts, fuck Badecker, he is completely irrelevant. Later on he bitches about how everyone is off-topic (a classic bitching method from Badecker and most apologists nowadays) and then, like always, he goes full retard by stating the following: '
Since atheists have a religion in atheism, but God isn't part of it, this shows that God and religion are two different things.' The stupidity of being religious and claiming that is tremendous, it is the damage that religion can actually do to a human brain (if he has one. IF) Let's do this in the simple way:
1. religion = the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods. (although the apologists monkeys, just like Badecker, tried to give the term another meaning, this is the true and main meaning of religion and, of course, the one we are talking about)
2. atheism = disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.
We encounter many problems here: first, religion sticks strictly to the belief in a God, regardless of the culture. Badecker is a religious guy, whether he likes it or not (he doesn't like it, that makes him even more stupid). Atheism is exactly the opposite of that. Calling atheism a religion is the same as calling abstinence a sex position. It simply isn't like that and what Badecker tries to do is a pseudo philosophy ( everything he does is a pseudo thing, including his pseudo God). What is a complete mind fuck is that Badecker believes religion and God are two different things. We all know that all of the religious cunts nowadays try to separate religion and God because it has been proven that religion has been and still is complete poison for the human race. What they fail in this procedure is the very fact that God can not exist without religion because religion is what defines a belief in a God, religion is what 'defined' each and every God, it brought 'evidence', books, teachings. Every God that existed in a culture on this planet was definitely tied and regulated by religion. Nobody and absolutely nobody is born and instantly knows about Jesus or Allah, or the great Juju on the bottom of the ocean. Everyone is raised in a culture, in the teachings of a religion that talks about a God. The stupidity in the claim that God has nothing to do with religion is bigger than the claim that God exists in the first place. My friends, we have a particular case here, our Badecker is more than a retard, he might be really sick, he could be suffering from a mental illness. My opinion is we should research this retard as much as we can. Fuck his opinions, we got used to him not being able to see the shit on his face, it is time to really use him as material. And don't worry, he is too stupid to actually understand, so we can all act as if nothing happened and we are really into his retarded claims. We're going hot on episode 13 fellas, hang on and have fun. Thanks to our retard, we might have precious material.

Religion as faith in God is also a religion. Science can not proof god existence, because god is anything that is missing. They can verify it after it exists, something like "provably fair", but then it is not more god. Obviously god is cursed not to exist. So, i made a joke about it: "god comes to earth and said: hi, ppl, are you crazy, I do not exist!" .... and that is all truth about god, evolution, at science and religion ....you can understand what is god if you become one .... ask zikalkis! .... he is presuming to work as secular god for 20 years already .... and he has 64 email addresses...while trump, putin, castro and queen have no any email address .... join my sites .... lolz

+1

Eventually, people would have to admit that belief in 'God' is essentially a mental disorder, a delusion.

It is no wonder people fight about who's 'God' is better.  Watching these debates Christian vs Muslim or Jews it is like watching mental patients arguing about their imaginary friends.  One guys tells the others "my guy flew to heaven on a winged horse", the other says that is nothing "my guy can walk on water", yet another guy would say "that is nothing my guy can separate waters and make a passage in the sea".  All equally ridiculous.

People who think they are proving the existence of God are really proving that they are insane.

Since atheists have a religion in atheism, but God isn't part of it, this shows that God and religion are two different things.

A person may simply believe in the existence of God because he does. It is his religion.

Another person may understand that God exists by looking at nature or through scientific proof. His religion might be believing things that God says, or it might be NOT believing the things that God says.

God exists. People have religion in whatever they believe. Proof for the existence of God simply places God into their understanding rather than their religion.

Well forgive me for simplying despite some of the long answers in previous posts but there will never be scientific proof that god exists because religion is a matter of faith, either you believe or you don't. The nature of faith is that if there were scientific proof there would be no such thing as faith and as such scientific proof of god contradicts the very nature of (most) religions.

Oh that's right. You forgot to look above and click the links.   

Wow.... all that writing and still no proof of your god's existence.

Are you in the wrong thread?

Here's your failing, puplet.

Simply stating that there is no proof doesn't make it so.

Rebutting proof might be difficult, although not impossible, if the proof is wrong.

Rebutting non-proof should be rather easy, and certainly easier than rebutting proof.

But you haven't rebutted anything.

At times you have simply said that you rebutted proof.

At other times you have said there isn't any proof to rebut.

You can't even make up your mind if there is proof or not. So, how could you do even the easy thing, and rebut any non-proof you might hope to find.

You do the only thing you can do. You blow hot air, and then print it up on this forum. All your talk is meaningless. The proof that all your talk is meaningless is in the previous few sentences.

Try and read this slow..... it might help your understanding Puddleduck.

"You have provided no proof, therefore there is nothing to disprove".

Many people have pointed this out to you, but you fail to understand.

I believe that this may be my fault, that I gave you too much credit, when in actual fact you are a simpleton. That is my fault and I am sorry for over estimating your ability.

P.S. Thanks for the pet name. I like it.

P.S.S Thanks for not denying that you are a hypocrite.