The usual garbage full of fallacies and misinformation...
I do not believe that god exists, I have never seen science show any evidence that God exists in this world, God is only in the imagination of every human being, I know that God is one People are respectable but they are not real
Cause and effect exists in everything we have found. So does entropy. So does complexity. Combining these scientifically shows that God exists. Why? Because these 3 couldn't exist in the universe without something that fits our definition of "God."
The whole operation of the universe is complex machinery. Machines have makers.
You never explained why complexity means that something was designed.
''The whole operation of the universe is complex machinery'' Keep making shit up. Not all machines have makers, a rock doesn't have a designer.
All machinery that we know is machinery, has designers. All the machine operations of this machinery use nature's machine operations. Everything is machinery. Machines have makers. Complex machines have complex makers. Machines as complex as the machines of nature and the universe, have such a complex Maker that He fits the definition of our word "God."
Thank you for prompting me to give a better explanation. I hope you stop denying the fact of God's existence before you deny yourself
out of existence. I mean, once you realize that God exists, then you have to find out about Him enough to be saved. Just know that He exists doesn't automatically bring salvation.
Why are you recycling the same bad and flawed argument?
''Everything is machinery.''
''All machinery that we know is machinery, has designers.'' No, we just know our things are designed because we know humans make things. We know a bottle is designed because we know bottles are made by humans and not found in nature, we didn't get inspired by nature to create bottles. Now you are jumping from, we know humans make stuff to, everything is a machine and therefore everything is designed. I mean, what? why? wtf? Nothing indicates a rock is designed.
If we see a house,… we conclude, with the greatest certainty, that it had an architect or builder because this is precisely that species of effect which we have experienced to proceed from that species of cause. But surely you will not affirm that the universe bears such a resemblance to a house that we can with the same certainty infer a similar cause, or that the analogy is here entire and perfect (Hume, Dialogues, Part II).
Second, Hume argues that, even if the resemblance between the material universe and human artifacts justified thinking they have similar causes, it would not justify thinking that an all-perfect God exists and created the world. For example, there is nothing in the argument that would warrant the inference that the creator of the universe is perfectly intelligent or perfectly good. Indeed, Hume argues that there is nothing there that would justify thinking even that there is just one deity: "what shadow of an argument... can you produce from your hypothesis to prove the unity of the Deity?
Animals, plants, humans, are far from perfect, nothing indicates that an all powerful god created them.