Scientific proof that God exists? - page 221.

berserkinterbuy

full member

Activity: 195

Merit: 100

Quote from: fuckitall on March 15, 2017, 10:16:38 PM

Quote from: 247crypto on August 13, 2014, 12:12:46 PM

If god exist, he need put some text under this line Grin

---------------------------------------------------------

Are you serious!!!! Have you ever thought that without battery or the use of any other fuel (except for food) How this human body is working ? Have you ever realised or felt your breath when you are in deep sleep ?...What i mean is apart from books and thesis there are common sense incidents that are a solid proof of existence of the god!!!...It's just that we have a habit of finding logic in each and every thing so we think have everything is happening just because another thing happened right before it..which compelled this thing to happen...Can't we think like this that every thing is happening by the grace of god ?

You do not even need to explain anything here. If people are looking for evidence of the existence of God, then they have problems with faith and probably with the psyche too. Faith always discarded material values, so what we believe has nothing to do with the earth and the body.

fuckitall

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Quote from: 247crypto on August 13, 2014, 12:12:46 PM

If god exist, he need put some text under this line Grin

---------------------------------------------------------

Are you serious!!!! Have you ever thought that without battery or the use of any other fuel (except for food) How this human body is working ? Have you ever realised or felt your breath when you are in deep sleep ?...What i mean is apart from books and thesis there are common sense incidents that are a solid proof of existence of the god!!!...It's just that we have a habit of finding logic in each and every thing so we think have everything is happening just because another thing happened right before it..which compelled this thing to happen...Can't we think like this that every thing is happening by the grace of god ?

qwik2learn

hero member

Activity: 636

Merit: 505

Inspired writings are evidence of the WORD. These texts are best explained by reference to a being or personality, so these words are likely not produced by human speakers. See the paper "The Problem of Seth's Origin" and others from this researcher.

Just last week I was able to prove to myself that a serious infection can be neutralized with remote scalar energy, also known as "remote healing"; anyone can repeat the experiment with better controls, but I am already convinced. God provides protection, it is proven scientifically by the remote healing of my infection. I am sure that I have received life and healing through the energy of GOD, who sustains life by His all-pervasive energy.

andrei56

sr. member

Activity: 840

Merit: 254

Personally I think this is being approached in the wrong way, this is a matter of faith, you believe in god or not regardless of whether there is proof or not.

Guzztsar

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 252

Surely our concept of God is totally wrong.
God must be beyond human understanding, so it can not be proven.

sapnu

sr. member

Activity: 1050

Merit: 286

For me, There's no scientific proof that god exists. It is based on your faith. If you believe in him, trust him and accept Jesus Christ as your Saviour. You will experiencing his grace. Grace means you receive what you do not deserve.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3990

Merit: 1385

Quote from: stats on February 27, 2017, 12:05:10 AM

Quote from: BADecker on February 26, 2017, 06:49:39 PM

Quote from: stats on February 26, 2017, 09:18:26 AM

Quote from: qwik2learn on February 26, 2017, 08:57:52 AM

Stats, why not address my proofs? Too challenging?

You answered your own question.

What you have stated is all hypothesis. Not fact, not proof.

Have you met your God in person? Have you sat down with him/her/it?

I am sure you have faith in your God, but that is not proof, because faith is a personal choice. Faith does not equal proof.

Also, your conclusion is based on your own assumptions. You have assumed that because man is that guarantor, it lays the basis of conflict with humanism. I disagree and believe that man believing himself to be the guarantor, highlights evidence of humanism and negates any further need for god.

You don't want to accept science hypotheses. You don't want to accept science facts:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
You have a fine religion of ignorance going on there.

Did you ever think of evangelizing it? Other religions have their TV evangelism, and make lots of money doing it. Think of how rich you could become.

Cool

I don;t feel the need to evangelize it. That is what religions do to take money from the sick and the poor.

Like I have pointed out..... the rebuttal is found in your links. You post the answers.

I do not want to be seen playing the tit for tat game with you because it would be you post your links and Ill post mine game. That is just a waste of your time and mine.

You have been disproved so move on.

Formal religions take nothing from anyone. Rather, people voluntarily donate. Even if a religion like Mormon requires people to pay 10%, it's because the people voluntarily stick themselves within that religion. No forced giving. Only donation.

The religion of atheism, on the other hand, forces people to pay. How? Consider all the atheistic teachings that go on in universities, where a student has to take all kinds of atheistic courses just to get the training he wants. Atheism steals the money from kids. Then when the kids default on their student loans, it goes onto the taxpayers. Atheism is the biggest religion theft of all.

Your suggestion that there is rebuttal in my links is all talk. How do we know this? You can't explain the rebuttal that you talk about. So we know that all you have is simple talk.

However, thanks for helping to show the proof that God exists, by saying that you can rebut the science, but then by not being even able to show a rebuttal. Keep it up. People need to know that God exists.

Wink

stats

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Quote from: BADecker on February 26, 2017, 06:49:39 PM

Quote from: stats on February 26, 2017, 09:18:26 AM

Quote from: qwik2learn on February 26, 2017, 08:57:52 AM

Stats, why not address my proofs? Too challenging?

You answered your own question.

What you have stated is all hypothesis. Not fact, not proof.

Have you met your God in person? Have you sat down with him/her/it?

I am sure you have faith in your God, but that is not proof, because faith is a personal choice. Faith does not equal proof.

Also, your conclusion is based on your own assumptions. You have assumed that because man is that guarantor, it lays the basis of conflict with humanism. I disagree and believe that man believing himself to be the guarantor, highlights evidence of humanism and negates any further need for god.

You don't want to accept science hypotheses. You don't want to accept science facts:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
You have a fine religion of ignorance going on there.

Did you ever think of evangelizing it? Other religions have their TV evangelism, and make lots of money doing it. Think of how rich you could become.

Cool

I don;t feel the need to evangelize it. That is what religions do to take money from the sick and the poor.

Like I have pointed out..... the rebuttal is found in your links. You post the answers.

I do not want to be seen playing the tit for tat game with you because it would be you post your links and Ill post mine game. That is just a waste of your time and mine.

You have been disproved so move on.

qwik2learn

hero member

Activity: 636

Merit: 505

Quote from: stats on February 26, 2017, 09:18:26 AM

I disagree and believe that man believing himself to be the guarantor, highlights evidence of humanism and negates any further need for god.

‘I do not feel that I am the product of chance, a speck of dust in the universe, but someone who was expected, prepared, prefigured. In short, a being whom only a Creator could put here; and this idea of a creating hand refers to God.’

Students of existentialism, the atheistic branch, will note that in this one sentence Sartre disavowed his entire system, his engagements, his whole life.
http://nobelists.weebly.com/uploads/4/0/2/0/4020654/50-nobelists-english.pdf

qwik2learn

hero member

Activity: 636

Merit: 505

Quote

Psychologist Brian Nosek of the University of Virginia says that the most common and problematic bias in science is “motivated reasoning”: We interpret observations to fit a particular idea. Psychologists have shown that “most of our reasoning is in fact rationalization,” he says. In other words, we have already made the decision about what to do or to think, and our “explanation” of our reasoning is really a justification for doing what we wanted to do—or to believe—anyway.
Science is of course meant to be more objective and skeptical than everyday thought—but how much is it, really?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-25/trumpocalypse-liberal-ivory-tower-academia-collapsing

"I was aware of biases in humans at large, but when I first “learned” that they also apply to scientists, I was somewhat amazed, even though it is so obvious"!

Looking at all of the eminent researchers who believed in cosmic consciousness is inspiring. You can see that they overcame the biases of materialist scientism.
https://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8pt/eminent_researchers

Sat1991

member

Activity: 73

Merit: 10

..... Make a better world for cryptocurrency .....

If god dont exist who created the universe?who created the earth?who created the people?who created the animals?who created trees?who gives us breath to live?
So if god dont exist why everything is living?
Just think of that question.
Amen

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3990

Merit: 1385

Quote from: stats on February 26, 2017, 09:18:26 AM

Quote from: qwik2learn on February 26, 2017, 08:57:52 AM

Stats, why not address my proofs? Too challenging?

You answered your own question.

What you have stated is all hypothesis. Not fact, not proof.

Have you met your God in person? Have you sat down with him/her/it?

I am sure you have faith in your God, but that is not proof, because faith is a personal choice. Faith does not equal proof.

Also, your conclusion is based on your own assumptions. You have assumed that because man is that guarantor, it lays the basis of conflict with humanism. I disagree and believe that man believing himself to be the guarantor, highlights evidence of humanism and negates any further need for god.

You don't want to accept science hypotheses. You don't want to accept science facts:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
You have a fine religion of ignorance going on there.

Did you ever think of evangelizing it? Other religions have their TV evangelism, and make lots of money doing it. Think of how rich you could become.

Cool

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3990

Merit: 1385

Quote from: stats on February 26, 2017, 01:18:19 AM

Quote from: BADecker on February 26, 2017, 01:11:09 AM

If there is proof or evidence in the links for non-existence, express it. Cool

Read your answers..... stop posting your links as proof and read the answers.

You have shown you know where your links are so follow them.

You are an intelligent person.... I know you can do it.

Hey, thanks for the advice. Re-reading my links makes me stand in awe of the great power and marvelous love of God.

Now for your rebuttal of the scientific facts that prove that God exists?

Cool

qwik2learn

hero member

Activity: 636

Merit: 505

Quote from: qwik2learn on February 25, 2017, 11:27:59 PM

Quote

By posting your links, you have opened up the possibility that your words and those of your god will be found to be false. So, please keep spreading the dribble.

Atheists:

If you are wedded to materialism, there must be a molecule (DNA) that functions as the source of speaking, walking, reading, and doing mathematics, but such an assumption falls apart very quickly.
http://www.chopra.com/articles/what-is-cosmic-consciousness#sm.0000bdr1gc1mmdi7t7w10u8atdyv8

Only when you have seen the evidence of consciousness and what it indicates can you form an informed opinion.

Kurt Godel used logic to conclude these points:
There are other worlds and rational beings of a different and higher kind.
The world in which we live is not the only one in which we shall live or have lived.

Atheist dogma can only form invalid and circular replies to facts presented by consciousness researchers:
https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-scientific-proof-of-existence-of-ghosts/answers/33828633/comment/30627732?__snid3__=764974911&__nsrc__=4

So I am posting all this hoping that a clever atheist can point out how I and so many others could all possibly be wrong about the presence of cosmic consciousness.

Eminent Researchers:
https://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8pt/eminent_researchers

qwik2learn

hero member

Activity: 636

Merit: 505

The conclusions of humanism may be rejected for want of explanatory power, this kind of simple hypothesis does not lead us to expect the relevant data. Humanists should seek a robust explanation of all of their assumptions, and the same goes for survivalists.

Quote

The data collected from mediumship or cases of the reincarnation type only serve as evidence for personal survival once various auxiliary hypotheses are introduced to facilitate the link between the data and the continued existence of the deceased person. This is often glossed over, or simply not acknowledged at all, because empirical survivalists routinely treat the survival hypothesis as a generic survival hypothesis, for example, the survival of individual consciousness, the mind, or the self. But this kind of simple survival hypothesis does not lead us to expect the relevant data, unless it is supplemented with a wide range of auxiliary statements about the knowledge, intentions, and causal powers of postmortem persons, as well as the mechanism or process of postmortem communication (in the case of mediumship) and rebirth (in reincarnation cases).

http://michaelsudduth.com/interview-on-postmortem-survival/

stats

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Quote from: qwik2learn on February 26, 2017, 08:57:52 AM

Stats, why not address my proofs? Too challenging?
I point to strong evidence supporting the survival hypothesis.
This hypothesis is antithetical to humanism, and since a rationalist atheist is a humanist, this is one definitive proof that the position of rationalist atheists is wrong.

Consider the Definition of humanism as necessarily rejecting the survival hypothesis. That is, all humanists reject the supernatural, god(s), "life after death", etc. This is because humanism is Defined as the idea that Man is the basis for existence, thought, and ethics and acts as the founder and guarantor of knowledge and thought.

Consider the Rational Principle that all reason and thinking must be backed by substance (especially when it comes to the God-question) and that therefore any denial of (a Supreme being called) GOD as the guarantor and founder of knowledge and reason is necessarily an affirmation of (a Rational being called) Man as that guarantor.

Conclusion: The knowledge acquired from the evidence is in conflict with humanism; therefore, GOD is the guarantor of knowledge, not Man.

You answered your own question.

What you have stated is all hypothesis. Not fact, not proof.

Have you met your God in person? Have you sat down with him/her/it?

I am sure you have faith in your God, but that is not proof, because faith is a personal choice. Faith does not equal proof.

Also, your conclusion is based on your own assumptions. You have assumed that because man is that guarantor, it lays the basis of conflict with humanism. I disagree and believe that man believing himself to be the guarantor, highlights evidence of humanism and negates any further need for god.

qwik2learn

hero member

Activity: 636

Merit: 505

BUMP for the concise refutation of atheism. Think it through.

Quote from: 1aguar on August 04, 2015, 01:59:54 AM

Quote from: 1aguar on August 03, 2015, 04:24:25 PM

"Let it be said that not all humanists are atheists, but presumably all atheists are humanists, since what else could they be?"
Atheism and Secularity, Page 10
Link

Only Man or GOD can be the guarantor of knowledge and thought (reason).
I propose (along with Mr. Eller) that a rationalist atheist would also dismiss claims about the entire line of "spiritual" thinking, as nothing more than a metaphor run amok.
This would be a mistake because Life after death is not a metaphor--it is backed by 52 salient points of evidence.
Now I am asking atheists to be rational with regards to the evidence; in common parlance this means that one can think clearly and is capable of intelligently assessing new ideas when presented.
I have just presented evidence refuting humanism, defined as the idea that Man is the basis for existence, thought, and ethics and acts as the founder and guarantor of knowledge and thought. For the humanist, a soul is a foreign and inert concept--and nothing more than a concept, literally a word without a referent. All humanists are without a belief in the afterlife.
I have proven that life exists after death, and that is where humanism is wrong about Man's consciousness.
I hope humanists will try to responsibly address the evidence, and likewise for any atheist.

qwik2learn

hero member

Activity: 636

Merit: 505

Stats, why not address my proofs? Too challenging?
I point to strong evidence supporting the survival hypothesis.
This hypothesis is antithetical to humanism, and since a rationalist atheist is a humanist, this is one definitive proof that the position of rationalist atheists is wrong.

Consider the Definition of humanism as necessarily rejecting the survival hypothesis. That is, all humanists reject the supernatural, god(s), "life after death", etc. This is because humanism is Defined as the idea that Man is the basis for existence, thought, and ethics and acts as the founder and guarantor of knowledge and thought.

Consider the Rational Principle that all reason and thinking must be backed by substance (especially when it comes to the God-question) and that therefore any denial of (a Supreme being called) GOD as the guarantor and founder of knowledge and reason is necessarily an affirmation of (a Rational being called) Man as that guarantor.

Conclusion: The knowledge acquired from the evidence is in conflict with humanism; therefore, GOD is the guarantor of knowledge, not Man.

stats

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Quote from: BADecker on February 26, 2017, 01:11:09 AM

Quote from: stats on February 26, 2017, 12:58:47 AM

Quote from: BADecker on February 26, 2017, 12:56:02 AM

Quote from: stats on February 26, 2017, 12:52:46 AM

Quote from: BADecker on February 26, 2017, 12:46:16 AM

Quote from: stats on February 26, 2017, 12:30:51 AM

Quote from: BADecker on February 26, 2017, 12:16:08 AM

Quote from: stats on February 25, 2017, 11:58:18 PM

Quote from: BADecker on February 25, 2017, 11:19:51 PM

Quote from: stats on February 25, 2017, 11:11:26 PM

Quote from: BADecker on February 25, 2017, 10:51:35 PM

Quote from: stats on February 25, 2017, 10:08:25 PM

Quote from: BADecker on February 25, 2017, 09:34:44 PM

Quote from: sirazimuth on February 24, 2017, 09:04:16 PM

god exists ffs!!
and the earth is flat and brass monkeys fly outta my ass!...

oh sorry... wrong thread, i saw BADecker and got confused... my bad

Well, you got the "God exists" part right, anyway. Now all you need to do is the scientific proof part.

Cool

Chuckles..... you know there is no proof that your god exists.

But if you want to prove it..... ask for the selfie.

Hey stats, thanks again for throwing your weight behind the proof that God exists. How do you do it? By never showing a rebuttal or refutation to the proof shown here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.

So, your help is incidental. But it is real all the same.

There will be newbies who will see this and understand the proof. Some of them will be strengthened in their understanding about God. But you seem to be satisfied with your silly babbling. You are like Beelzebub, lord of flies... always buzzing around talking, but loving the stench of your rotting ignorance more than the truth. Keep you religion of ignorance. Because that is all it is, a religion.

Cool

Actually, I am happy to say to all concerned..... "read each and every comment posted above in the links". "Read the entire forum and gain perception into the mindset of a delusional narcissistic individual by the name of BADecker".

The proof others seek are in those forums, all they need do is read them and discover the comments which you believe to be truth, have been proven false.

I am sure each and every individual can and will make up their own mind.

By posting your links, you have opened up the possibility that your words and those of your god will be found to be false. So, please keep spreading the dribble.

If the scientific proofs for the existence of God that I have shown have been rebutted, that rebuttal hasn't made its way to this forum, yet. If so, show it and explain it. Until you do, you are only proving that you are unable, and are thereby strengthening that proof with every post wherein you say that God doesn't exist.

Cool

The proof is in the discussion threads.

Many have argued it, and proved it, and the only one to continue posting irrelevant crap is you posting your same argument. That makes you delusional as all science is peer reviewed, and the arguments rebutting your points are peer reviewed on this forum. That is the proof needed.

No-one else posts your links..... why is that?

It's okay that you can't even express one point that rebuts the proof that God exists. Perhaps there are some rebuttals in the threads somewhere. If you found one, it is really okay to say it. Nobody is going to feel badly about you if you come on out and express it. In fact, there are probably quite a few atheists that would look up to you if you could explain even one.

We are waiting. Do it soon. The longer you wait, the stronger the proof for the existence of God becomes in the minds of everyone.

Cool

Just one.... hmmmm......

You say your God created everything and that nothing can be without your god creating it.

Then who created your god?

Creating has to do with things in this universe. God always existed. However, even if He was created, He is so great and different that we would not be able to understand what it meant to create Him, or who or what could have done it.

When you build a house, you are in existence before the house is built. The house does not approximate you in any way. It is completely different than you. Same with God and the universe. God is so extremely different in His nature that He is beyond understanding... by us, his houses. The difference between God and us is far greater than the difference between us and the microbes.

No rebuttal there.

Cool

Where is your proof of all of that?

Show me that he exists?

Just saying that he has always existed does not make it true.

So... yes rebuttal still stands.

The proof is above, in this post, in the links for the proofs. Cool

As is the evidence of non-existence.