Topic: Scientific proof that God exists? - page 483. (Read 845804 times)

God exists - in your head only.

People 'need' God or a type of 'relation to something greater' to fill in a type of emotional void they are experiencing - they do it to justify that 'their loved ones' aren't gone and that 'we must certainly see them again too when we die!', which is naive and gullible - your personality and traits are predetermined from your environment and your genetic material - ergo you come back every century or so, and for that matter you aren't completely YOU, you're just a reset consciousness that is turned back on through the process of meiosis    

Stop attributing favorable events and circumstances of chance to being a miracle - cause you talking out loud to  yourself while holding your hands to a multidimensional being really solves everything.... right???


concept of reincarnation is true
concept of greater beings 'watching over us' without showing or giving any evidence of their own efforts toward self preservation is false


Entrophy = wins
Equilibrium = wins

Thus, Omnipresence implies that God is simply all forms of matter and lack thereof
Thus, Omnipotence implies that God cannot exist because then said God also has all knowledge of outcomes from not being present.  


Serendipitous results without a clearly defined experiment and control group - and this is based on the efforts of one guy, I mean he could have flubbed his findings to make his experiment seem bigger than it was (reality was inconclusive and he lied saying they were correlated)  (I'm really going out on a limb with this guess as I didn't bother reading the PDF yet)  Will give feedback on it soon.

These guys are getting really concrete:

http://www.iqpr.asia/en/technology/index.html

Mainstream scientific consensus is not powerful enough to explain the evidence for survival:


Is mainstream science going to give us any information at all on this subject? I challenge you to explain the evidence using consensus theories.

Without timely response, it is affirmed that empirical science CANNOT explain everything.

Thank you.   

That's a cute guess.  And guesses aren't bad things.  But for your guesses to amount to knowledge, you have to devise an experiment and get a lot more concrete about things.

You say "people" like you say "scientists." What I mean is, you can find loads of people who believe all different kinds of things, just like you can find many scientists who understand the same evidence in many different ways.

What's interesting is that some of the smaller subatomic particles are showing far less "particle" action, far greater "wave" action, and something else that hasn't been defined, yet. It's my guess that the "something else" has to do with consciousness.

Well, that's difficult for me because in my own belief system I consider "supernatural" to be a synonym of "imaginary".

As far as what people can work together to achieve, I have no idea and I'd be pretentious to pretend I did.  I suppose that acutely it has a lot to do with whether or not our species kills ourselves off with nuclear weapons or too much carbon dioxide in the upper atmosphere.

Doesn't change the point I just made.  Everything you believe, and all your arguments, are based off a book that was written when people thought the sun raced across the sky on a chariot.  Those wrong beliefs and ideals are the bible.

I'd have more respect for you people if you had any kind of new evidence in the last 2,000 years.

 

You know? The Bosnian pyramids show that the people of Atlantis knew a whole lot more about science than we give them credit for. And some of their knowledge was so different from ours that we are just beginning to relearn it.

Don't limit yourself. Envision what it would be like for people to work together toward the goal of reaching right into the "supernatural."

You know, you base everything off a book that was written when people knew squat about science.  Don't you understand that?  Your house is built on a foundation of cards.

Yet the Messiah was for everyone who believed. So how would an earthly kingship be available to those who had passed already? People want it now. So, they misinterpret a lot.

The Revelation in the Bible sets it out rather plainly in some ways. The book of Hebrews is another that helps. St. Paul's writings suggest that we don't know what form we are going to take in Heaven.

Science can explain everything.  Look at all that was unknown when god was first invented.  Soon, science will explain everything.

Lol, I guess by "what God said in Genesis" you're referring to what the J-writer or the P-writer said in Genesis.  

Anyway, if youre version of God is a natural phenomenon tied to predictable observation then haven't you taken away his/her/its Godness?

As far as reaching into heaven: Yuri Gagarin is usually the first credited with this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_Gagarin).

Supernatural is a term used to explain what the science still can not explain. Only closed minded people think science can explain everything and can not think outside the box.

Look at what God said in Genesis, during the time that the people were building the Tower of Babel: "The LORD said, 'If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them.'"

Probably reaching right into Heaven is something that people could do if they all joined together and put their minds to it. So, is there really supernatural? Or is it a word that is used to cover a certain form of ignorance that we have?

It sounds like you're saying you don't believe in a supernatural.  Which, as far as I can tell, means that you don't believe in a supernatural God.  I think that's a totally respectable belief system.

Yet there are many things that are common now, that 200 years ago would have been CALLED supernatural.

I would say that regarding things in this universe, nothing is supernatural. Some things only appear that way, and will until we find the technology to control them.

As long as "God" remains in the realm of the supernatural, ie, the unobservable, there will never be scientific proof that he/she/it exists by definition.  Science, by definition, is about building and testing hypothesis based on repeatable, observable experimentation.  Anyone who expects to find scientific proof for "God" either has a non-traditional view of "God" (ie God is not supernatural) or else has a mistaken view of science.