Topic: Scientific proof that God exists? - page 288. (Read 845654 times)

As I explained to you the last time you said this, faith doesn't have to be blind faith.

For example, if you hold up your closed hand and say, "I have a folded up $5 dollar bill in my closed hand," some people have faith that you are telling the truth. Others think that you are lying.

Those who have faith that you are holding a $5, can see your hand and you for a fact. So, they can have faith that the $5 might be there, 'cause they don't know you very well. Others who know you better, can see that you are there, and that you are holding up your hand (facts), but because they know you, they know that there is great probability that you are lying. Thus they have faith that there is NOT a $5 in your hand.


What next step? There is no next step.

If you have proof of god then you have lost your faith in god. You cannot have proof and faith at the same time.
Why are you insisting people lose their faith in existence of god?

What next step? There is no next step.

No, the things that you are trying to do are these. You are trying to get me to capitulate into your fallacies so that you have comfort in the idea that one of the few people who shows proof for God was wrong after all. You are trying to get me to suggest that I am wrong when I am not to keep the political and scientific status quo as it is. Common understanding of the things shown at https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395 proves that I am right.

What's your big hang-up, anyway. If you broke your arm, you wouldn't simply say, "I don't believe it," and get on with life with a broken arm like nothing ever happened. No. You would get the arm taken care of, by the medical if at all possible. Why do you keep on resisting the knowledge that God exists when it has been proven to you, when you can prove it to yourself?

Wake up and see that God really DOES exist so that you can go the next step and see the good that He is all about... FOR YOU.

Thats just another fallacy, suggesting that because you cant disprove something means it exists. You are just full of fallacies man, we are trying to explain it to you but you choose to ignore it.

Yes, but if you ask a dead guy for the proof of an afterlife, you won't get any answer, either. This doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. It simply means that the afterlife isn't for those living in this life.

Blakjag has all kinds of info that suggests there is an afterlife. What Blakjag is wrong about is what that afterlife consists of. A medium gets info from somewhere. We don't know who or what is transferring the info.

The important thing that Blakjag is missing regarding this thread, he could be proving that God exists, like the title of the thread requests. Rather, he wants to go off into a lot of unproven, suggestive ideas that are beyond the scope of the topic.

Most of the folks who post a lot here, and don't believe in God, are way off topic. Much of what they do is badmouth God believers, or say that there is no proof for God when the stuff that I present at https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395 shows that at the very least, if a person can barely think, the odds are that God exists, by a long shot. Anyone who looks at the link info and is a bit of a thinker, can see the proof that God exists. Nobody shows proof that God DOESN"T exist.

The thinking, intelligent unbelievers are simply liars, because there is no other way to interpret the info at the link than to see that God exists.



EDIT: Some say that there is no way that anybody could prove that God doesn't exist. Well, this is another piece of evidence suggesting that He does exist.

There is an experiment but i dont rememner its name now, wich made you have "god experiencies" pretty much made you have hallucinations that some people believed it was god who was talking to them, obviously was not it was just the stimulation of the brain in that certain way, i dont remember exactly how tho.

There is no proof of the afterlife.  A body starts dying, the brain is deprived of oxygen and starts firing neurons at random, the brain interprets that as reality.

Certainly not proof. 

If you find something that I post to be in conflict with any other information, please make that known! I have made every effort to remove such conflicts from the information I present here humbly.

Skepticism of psychic phenomena is based more on a religion of materialism than on hard science.
The burden of proof has shifted to skeptics of an afterlife.

Scientists Claim That Quantum Theory Proves Consciousness Moves To Another Universe At Death

"This account of quantum consciousness explains things like near-death experiences, astral projection, out of body experiences, and even reincarnation without needing to appeal to religious ideology."

The replication of NDEs satisfies the scientific method.
Atheists believe in an afterlife after having NDEs

People having NDEs have brought back scientific discoveries.



Contact with "the dead" have occurred under scientific controls.

I wonder how is he going to respond to this, my guess is that he will ignore it or try to decieve the conversation to something else wich is a another fallacy btw haha. Thanks for the wikipedia link, hopefully it helps badecker understand how much crap he talks.

Here, you are committing the logical fallacy of "false dichotomy" by claiming there are only two options when in fact there are others.

This fallacy is explicitly listed among the others as shown here :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

You are commiting a fallacy right there:
False dilemma (false dichotomy, fallacy of bifurcation, black-or-white fallacy) – two alternative statements are held to be the only possible options, when in reality there are more.

You only provide two options but in reality im saying your stuff in that link is all fallacies because thats what it is, fallacies.