Furthermore, if anyone claims that there is scientific proof of such an entity (I'm looking at you BADecker), then they are either deluded, or confused as to what the scientific method actually accomplishes.
Topic: Scientific proof that God exists? - page 81. (Read 845587 times)
religious people are weaktards, they need to believe in imaginary beings/powers/things to find meaning in life, while the one truth is all over the place, nature.
Mother nature is our "god" and the best part, there´s no need for fancy expensive untaxed temples, she teach us the value of life, she feed us and she can kill us, that´s true power, not some random old book that some religious weaktard wrote out of air to keep controling people´s minds. And that is for all fucking religions.
cheers.
Mother nature is our "god" and the best part, there´s no need for fancy expensive untaxed temples, she teach us the value of life, she feed us and she can kill us, that´s true power, not some random old book that some religious weaktard wrote out of air to keep controling people´s minds. And that is for all fucking religions.
cheers.
The only doubts i have about god (because i believe there is something that is bigger and greater than all of us) is that if he loves everyone and is willing to forgive everyone then why have things like cancer? i know its a question that has been asked by thousands but how can someone that is meant to love and protect people give innocent children and people horrible terminal diseases like cancer etc?
Scientology is the one true religion and L. Ron Hubbard is the one true God. LOL
and this fallacies and misinformation are.....?
I will be interesting to hear which facts in this articles are false and why.
Otherwise, I will have to confess that this articles really made impact on me.
I will be interesting to hear which facts in this articles are false and why.
Otherwise, I will have to confess that this articles really made impact on me.
assuming that an entity is perfect, that entity will be free of all needs. The need of companionship imply that he is not perfect particularly if it is a tremendous big need (he created tremendously large number of different entities).
Moreover those entities will not match His greatness because are all inferior, this could imply that He need to boss them (worst need than the first).
furthermore, if we assume that he is good and forgiving, how he could inflict eternal damnation to his creatures when they misbehave (according to His law) ? inflicting eternal sufferings and being good does not match
Moreover those entities will not match His greatness because are all inferior, this could imply that He need to boss them (worst need than the first).
furthermore, if we assume that he is good and forgiving, how he could inflict eternal damnation to his creatures when they misbehave (according to His law) ? inflicting eternal sufferings and being good does not match
so far there is no scientific proof that accurate, only depends on belief. this will be related to the religion of the person adopted. their religion has taught its believer to be sure to god.
assumptions which cannot be proven -- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.
You just assume all equations can be proven. I agree that assumption cannot be proven.
Therefore your conclusion that a god exists is just an assumption.
Bravo! An A+ in political science for you. More and more political science from you is all we need. The more you blab, the more you show that you are stupidity's excuse for existence.
All your proof is circular reasoning that when applied to something else can prove something else.
Most of your talk is political science blabbing, since you can't use any factual science to show that cause and effect, entropy, and complexity don't prove the existence of God.
The factual science that doesn't say everything has a cause? In what science does it say that everything has a cause?
All science shows it. It doesn't have to be said. The greater the scientist, the more he/she uses cause and effect.
Name one science that says or shows that everything has a cause and I will agree with you even though it wont prove god.
this concerns the trust of each person. every religion will show proof of the existence of their god in its own way.
The science religion tries to show the proof of its god... mankind. But instead it shows the proof of the creator God.
assumptions which cannot be proven -- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.
You just assume all equations can be proven. I agree that assumption cannot be proven.
Therefore your conclusion that a god exists is just an assumption.
Bravo! An A+ in political science for you. More and more political science from you is all we need. The more you blab, the more you show that you are stupidity's excuse for existence.
All your proof is circular reasoning that when applied to something else can prove something else.
Most of your talk is political science blabbing, since you can't use any factual science to show that cause and effect, entropy, and complexity don't prove the existence of God.
The factual science that doesn't say everything has a cause? In what science does it say that everything has a cause?
All science shows it. It doesn't have to be said. The greater the scientist, the more he/she uses cause and effect.
assumptions which cannot be proven -- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.
You just assume all equations can be proven. I agree that assumption cannot be proven.
Therefore your conclusion that a god exists is just an assumption.
Bravo! An A+ in political science for you. More and more political science from you is all we need. The more you blab, the more you show that you are stupidity's excuse for existence.
All your proof is circular reasoning that when applied to something else can prove something else.
Most of your talk is political science blabbing, since you can't use any factual science to show that cause and effect, entropy, and complexity don't prove the existence of God.
The factual science that doesn't say everything has a cause? In what science does it say that everything has a cause?
I really doubt there is any scientific proof to describe god existence.
assumptions which cannot be proven -- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.
You just assume all equations can be proven. I agree that assumption cannot be proven.
Therefore your conclusion that a god exists is just an assumption.
Bravo! An A+ in political science for you. More and more political science from you is all we need. The more you blab, the more you show that you are stupidity's excuse for existence.
All your proof is circular reasoning that when applied to something else can prove something else.
Most of your talk is political science blabbing, since you can't use any factual science to show that cause and effect, entropy, and complexity don't prove the existence of God.
assumptions which cannot be proven -- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.
You just assume all equations can be proven. I agree that assumption cannot be proven.
Therefore your conclusion that a god exists is just an assumption.
Bravo! An A+ in political science for you. More and more political science from you is all we need. The more you blab, the more you show that you are stupidity's excuse for existence.
All your proof is circular reasoning that when applied to something else can prove something else.
assumptions which cannot be proven -- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.
You just assume all equations can be proven. I agree that assumption cannot be proven.
Therefore your conclusion that a god exists is just an assumption.
Bravo! An A+ in political science for you. More and more political science from you is all we need. The more you blab, the more you show that you are stupidity's excuse for existence.
assumptions which cannot be proven -- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.
You just assume all equations can be proven. I agree that assumption cannot be proven.
Therefore your conclusion that a god exists is just an assumption.
Computer Scientists 'Prove' God Exists
For centuries, many have tried to use this kind of abstract reasoning to prove the possibility or necessity of the existence of God. But the mathematical model composed by Gödel proposed a proof of the idea. Its theorems and axioms -- assumptions which cannot be proven -- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.
What do you think?
Please share your opinion about this article.
101 Proofs For God
A growing list of common sense Proofs for God.
Proof for God, #65 Mitochondrial Eve and Y-Chromosome Adam
Genetic scientists seem to be in general agreement that we are all descendants of one woman and one man. This research was fairly recent, starting about 1978. They, of course, do not believe in the creation story of Adam and Eve in the Bible, but their conclusions are getting closer and closer.
In case you have not heard about this, it makes very interesting reading. But I think it raises a number of profound challenges to the Theory of Evolution.
The scientists base the above conclusions on the known facts of human reproduction, specifically on properties of the sperm and egg. .....
Full article read here: http://101proofsforgod.blogspot.com/2014/07/65-mitochondial-eve-and-y-chromosome.html
Please share your opinion about this article.
101 Proofs For God
A growing list of common sense Proofs for God.
Proof for God, #65 Mitochondrial Eve and Y-Chromosome Adam
Genetic scientists seem to be in general agreement that we are all descendants of one woman and one man. This research was fairly recent, starting about 1978. They, of course, do not believe in the creation story of Adam and Eve in the Bible, but their conclusions are getting closer and closer.
In case you have not heard about this, it makes very interesting reading. But I think it raises a number of profound challenges to the Theory of Evolution.
The scientists base the above conclusions on the known facts of human reproduction, specifically on properties of the sperm and egg. .....
Full article read here: http://101proofsforgod.blogspot.com/2014/07/65-mitochondial-eve-and-y-chromosome.html
What evidence could science give for the existance of an imaginary beeing? This is nonsense.
Science is simply the discovering "stuff" that religion already knows is there.
Science has been disproving religion for hundreds of years now...
Pull your head out of the sand, ignorant one.
Science and religion rarely or never really intersects.
Science is simply the discovering "stuff" that religion already knows is there.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors
Yeaaah, no.
Science is dismissing religion's arguments one by one. We no longer believe in witches, miracles or demonic possessions.
Jump to: