Topic: Scientific proof that God exists? - page 278. (Read 845578 times)

im pretty sure god is not exist, so i think dont need to prove anything

Are they fuck the same argument. You're simply demonstrating your ignorance about the meaning of the scientific term, 'Theory'.


A scientific theory is rooted in an hypothesis which is still considerably superior a starting point as it requires a reasonable basis for formulating it in the first place.

The theist 'theory' you are alluding as being equal to that which is borne of objective processes, is the layman's meaning of the word, 'theory', which is equal to, "Hey, I have a theory about [insert arbitrary claim here]". Which is not at all the same thing and is usually less a sound theory and more wild speculation.

Seems to me that the choice is between science as God, or something else as God. Science is so far behind as God - just like the atheism religion - that we might as well forget the whole thing (keep the engineering aspect of science).

Both sides are presenting the same argument that eventually leads to what we deem "theory" in which our current level of technology can't provide the complete concrete proof of, so we will all be waiting on these "god" arguments, just as we will be waiting on the "advanced scientific theory" that can't be yet proved by humanity.

There are two sides to the line, but don't forget the line: Neutralty.
Viz.

Since no one could prove it yet, it has been established that God doesn't exist. 

And hobbits exist.

Since theories are not necessarily fact, they are part of the process of scientific method for determining fact. In other words, theories aren't conclusions. Rather, they are delusions that are stepping stones in the proof process.

No, they are not a part of the scientific method.  A method is a method.  Theories are conclusions, not methods.   

Consequently, there is no "science fiction" here.  The scientific method is valid, and the theories you mentioned are conclusions derived from that method.  It then follows that these theories are also valid (i.e. in an empirical context, and so long as the method was properly executed).

"Science" of a scientist is a word. "Miracle" is a word. Some happening that acts extremely differntly than science would expect might be a miracle. Until science finds the reason for said happening, the happening might be a miracle, because science may never be able to explain it. Of course, it still might not be a miracle. Science might simply always be ignorant.

By far most of the REAL science that exists doesn't explain why and how the universe exists, or what is behind most of the operations within the universe. Thus, when scientists or others hypothesize or otherwise make suggestions for things not known as fact in science, they might be using the scientific method if they do it properly, but until the hypotheses become proven fact, they are science fiction even if they are part of the scientific method.

To state it directly, most of the major scientific theories - things like Big Bang, black holes, inanimate-to-life by evolution, age of universe, chaos theory, stars operate by nuclear reactions, non-hollow earth, etc. - are science fiction at the same time that they are part of the scientific method.

The point is, most of the major ideas about basic stuff in the universe can be consigned to the position of science fiction. Until it can be explained, much of it can be consigned to the position of miracle, simply because we don't really have any even near plausible explanation for it.

Because of the things pointed out at https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395, even if God existed only in the realm of fiction, science is proving God more and more each day, even if it happens to be the science fiction part of science wherein God falls. Simply because the "God" hypothesis is seldomly stated in popular public scientific gatherings and announcements, doesn't mean that it does not exist. Because so extremely much of the known universe is unexplained, the God hypothesis is the greatest of all scientific hypotheses.

The greater point is, most of what the universe is made of, and where it comes from, and how it came into existence is entirely unknown. The multitudes of unknowns can be explained by God as they have been for millennia.

The above, also, explains which God... the REAL God... the one that exists in our inner being... that we feel as we exist as part of the unexplained universe.

The major evidence for the existence of God that I left out of my above linked post is, the odds. According to the way the universe operates (entropy), the odds are extremely against something like life ever happening. And the complexity of life as it exists is impossible to the extreme... according to the odds.

Which God? Find the one that defies the odds in any of the religions. That's the REAL God. To my way of thinking, not only does the Judeo-Christian God fit this category, but the Bible, itself, fits the category of not being possible to exist. Of course, one can only see it if he/she examines it in detail... from the history of how it came into being to the quantiy, quality, scope, and depth of information within it to the traditions of the nation of Israel regarding it to the fulfilled prophesies within it, etc.

As it turns out, scientifically speaking, the universe is far less likely to exist than God or the Bible.

I too have spent some time on the "Marketplace" boards here.

But really, I don't think some vague idea of a god is that big a deal. It's the fact that people around here literally think you have to be "saved" or you're going to Hell. They are all for freedom of religion as long as it is their religion. Maybe once a larger body of knowledge shows that consciousness comes from the brain rather than the soul, it will be easy to disprove the concept of heaven/hell to these people and religion will either unravel or become less influential after that.

Where did you get the idea from god then? If not from the bible

You'll also be needing to check up on the meaning of the term, "Ad hominem", it is not a commercial for a gay white rapper.

See, your failure to understand and practice intellectual honesty leads you to make baseless assertions as though they were fact and to utilise your 'absolute certainty' in the belief it lends credence to your almighty imagination

See, you're asserting something yet the basis by which you are asserting it is entirely fallacious.

You lack intellectual integrity. That is not an ad-hominem, that is a rational observation derived from the data you have thus far presented, namely, confidently asserted wild speculation as fact.

Humans. We have a penchant for selling bullshit and others buying it throughout time. Sadly it still continues to this day.

This is called "appealing to the masses" a common fallacious argument.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

What created your god?

I don't totally understand, but it is true that most people alive today and certainly most who lived in the past 10,000 years believed in some kind of God and would agree with you. I know that is one of the arguments; "There must be a God because so many believe in a God."

It does bring up the question of which God. So many religions contradict one another and that makes it even more unclear. Is it Ahura Mozda, Yum Kimil, Ganesha? There are thousands of Gods and each has it's devoted followers who believe with all their heart that their God is real. Are they all correct or are they all wrong? If asked I think many of them would say that only they are right and all other Gods are the product of a delusional mind.

This is why logic, math and science have taken over the world and is replacing religion as a dominant philosophical paradigm. It is not subjective and belief has nothing to do with it. 1+1=2 no matter who or where you are. The Earth goes around the Sun even if the Bible says it does not.
It does not depend on a vague notion or "sense" of Gods presence. Those things are simply not universal in how they are experienced. When a Hindu cries at his transcendent experience of mystical joy is he delusional? Or when I stand in awe at the wondrous mysteries of nature is that different? I don't know.

I don't have scientific proof but I can tell you something that someone close to me told me.

If you seen a boat in the ocean and someone told you it was created by no one.
Would you believe it? If you said no there's your answer. Everything was created by someone. If you said no that is okay as it is your opinion as how you see religion and god.

Hope I helped in some way

Can ants argue with humans that Bitcoin is a fairy tale?

I said a thousand times, i am against religions but you are just too dumb my friend 

I'm ignorant?  You believe in fairy tales.  

Anyway, I don't argue with brainwashed fools - stick your head back in the sand my friend.  

Every day thousands of people are giving up on religion. Society as a whole is getting educated.  Time is on my side.  

Good, enjoy your pathetic ignorant life in a bubble. Leave things beyond average minds to us 

Just like you cannot teach an ant the significance of Bitcoin

I'm an atheist.  You're the one that's pathetic my friend.