Topic: Scientific proof that God exists? - page 95. (Read 845650 times)

I think that is what God did to prove to make that he is really God in every area of life.

But in nature, insect, in the river, our life etc.

He is everywhere.

So you post a video titled: ''Cern Proclaims There Is a God'' I ask you for reference and this is your answer? The random dude in that random video states that ''scientists'' are claiming god is real yet I haven't seen any evidence or reference to when or where these scientists are. I already destroyed your complexity + entropy argument, what more do you need?

That's interesting. I have also watched the video telling about the experiment that proved the existance of soul.

I don't know if anybody can explain anything to you. After all, anybody who thinks that all scientists are expert in every scientific field, and then maintains it without considering it, is one of the goofiest people around.

You might not be a fool. You might only be retarded.

 

You are such an anomaly. Perhaps the most important question in history asks itself, right in your face. And you want someone else to do your research for you. But when he does, you simply disregard it, call him a liar, and then ask for more research from him.

I might ask how goofy you can get. But I don't have to. You will continue to show us. Just watch.

 

Why doesn't every scientist understand that?

If you had actual proof, wouldn't they?

Everyone on earth that doesn't believe in your fairy tale (the vast majority) is a fool in your eyes?  How sad.

 

And again a response that has nothing to do with what you are quoting, go figure. I asked for the reference of when CERN scientists have said that god exists, could you provide it? Or are you just a liar?

''Why? Because all complex design that we know of has an intelligent designer.'' No, the only things we know are designed are things designed by us or animals. We know they are designed by comparing them to nature not because they are complex. We don't know if nature is designed since there is nothing to compare it to.

''Since there are countless things that have design, but we don't clearly see who the designer is, there might be question about who the designer is/was.'' How do you know those things have design, how do you know a rock is designed?

Are you God, that I have to make everything that I post revolve around something that you said? LOL!

You are finally starting to acknowledge the existence of God without wanting to. God is doing this for you, with the hope that you might, somehow, be saved.

Kurt, himself, explains it. Research him.

However, thanks for acknowledging that there is design in everything. And the only designs that we have a clear understanding about who designed them, show that the designer was intelligent.

Since there are countless things that have design, but we don't clearly see who the designer is, there might be question about who the designer is/was. Then we look at the complexity of the design. When we apply cause and effect to the design, we understand that it was God that designed them, even if they were also designed by men or angels (aliens).

Why? Because all complex design that we know of has an intelligent designer. The complexity of the design of physics shows that the designer is intelligent way beyond mankind. It fits the description of God.

Or do you want to suggest that there isn't any intelligent design to your own posts in this forum?

That has nothing to do with that I said, again ignoring arguments, something that you often do. When have CERN scientists said god exists lol. Where is the reference or a link for that? That's just a video of a deluded person like you saying they said that, I searched all over google and couldn't find 1 article where any CERN scientist said anything about god.

When you believe, God provides you with special, spiritual proof of His existence. But God doesn't want the unbelievers to go on their way and die eternally... simply because they don't understand that He exists. That's why He gives scientific proof for His existence. Even the Bible talks about the proof. See a few world proofs listed in the Bible at https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.23902422.

Further, James in the Bible says that even demons believe that there is one God. But it doesn't do them any good. See James 2:19:The point is that simply having proof that God exists isn't enough to save yourself from destruction.

Proof for the existence of God is only the beginning. Once you know that God exists, then you have to believe what He says. If you don't believe Him, all your knowledge of Him is useless.

This being a science thread, jump to the proofs offered at https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.23902422, and then consider how they are scientific proofs as well as Bible proofs.

this world really exist, ofcourse there's a creater, and the creater is almighty GOD.

The only proof that God really exists is when you BELIEVE.

Cern Proclaims There Is a God







Cern Proclaims There Is a God

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbg4rDEedN4

''As for design, no matter what we find on earth, be it something man-made or something not man-made, when we get down to the fundamentals of it, it is extremely complex.'' However my  point was and it's clear that you didn't read it, that something complex doesn't mean something designed. ''Complex effects are design.'' Because you say so? ''There is nothing that we find that is opposite to this'' Opposite to what? There is nothing that we found that is not designed by humans or animals so far either.

''Even simple rocks are complex at their atomic level. All is complexity. Complexity comes about via design.'' Prove it. You can't say, rocks are complex, all is complex, complex is design. How the fuck did you come up with that conclusion lol. I already argued with you on how we know things are designed, we compare them with nature, we don't look to see if they are complex or not necessarily. ''
For example, many naturally occurring rock fragments just happen to have a sharp edge that is well-suited for serving the purpose of chopping meat, though this does not lead us to believe that these fragments were designed.  Yet, we have found clearly manufactured prehistoric chopping and cutting stones that were designed.  How do we know they were designed and not just examples of fortuitous rock fractures?  Clearly it is not because they are sharp, since naturally occurring rocks are also sharp; and not because they are complex, since they have neither parts nor complexity; and not because they serve a purpose, since obviously random events can make a rock very sharp.  We know these stone hand axes were designed because they have markings on them that differ from what one would find in nature—that is, they have signs of manufacture.''
Again, we don't know if simple rocks also have a designer, you are just assuming that.


Also would you mind explaining how kurt godel incompleteness theorem applies to god because I would love to have a laugh on that as well.

Many scientists understand from science that God exists. And, atheists are fools, whether or not anyone wants to label them as such.

The "gods" that you speak of are simply people. Most people - even scientists - believe that people exist.

If that were true, every scientist would believe in gods, with atheists obviously labelled as fools.

The science, and therefore the scientific proof, exists only in your fairy tale.

Sounds like you are trying to ignore Kurt Gödel's stuff, which is science stuff that applies to this conversation. As long as you keep bringing religion into it, you are showing that you are trying to deny Gödel's stuff, which as you admit above, doesn't have anything to do with religion.

Simply because God has intelligence that is greater than ours, doesn't have anything to do with the fact that He doesn't necessarily have to rely on it, or that intelligence is one of his Personal fundamentals. In fact, Gödel's Theorem suggests the opposite about God regarding any need He might have for anything in the universe. God doesn't need any of this, or rely on it or anything like it. Scientifically, Gödel's Theorem suggests this.

God Himself isn't scientific or religious. But science shows that He exists, just as religion does.

As long as you try to beat around the bush rather than talk directly about this, you are showing that you don't really have a response.

As for design, no matter what we find on earth, be it something man-made or something not man-made, when we get down to the fundamentals of it, it is extremely complex. Matter is composed of extremely complex energies in combination, that react upon each other to produce that which we call matter. Cause and effect show that everything came about by a cause that produced an effect. Complex effects are design. There is nothing that we find that is opposite to this. Even simple rocks are complex at their atomic level. All is complexity. Complexity comes about via design. Since it all works together in the universe, the whole universe was designed.

Gravity, evolution have to do with science and science proves zeus exists, what the fuck are you even talking about. I already talked about how godel's theorem cannot be applied to theology (or to prove god in any way, therefore meaningless to the conversation) I already proved you didn't know how to apply entropy. And I just argued about complexity, which you just ignored like you did now saying I'm talking about religion, because that's what you do, ignore arguments.

''God’s own complexity implies that He also had a designer.  Either the theist is arguing for an infinite regress of God-designers and designers of God-designers, etc., or he is contradicting his own assumption that complexity requires design.  By using God as an “explanation” the theist is doing nothing more than explaining complexity (in living things) with complexity (God’s).  But this amounts to assuming what one is trying to explain, which is no explanation at all.  It just moves the mystery back a step.''

''assumes humans determine whether or not something is designed by seeing if it has an accurate adjustment of parts—that is, if it shows complexity.  But this is certainly mistaken.  We know that something is designed not by its complexity, or even the degree to which it appears to serve a purpose, but by looking for ways in which it differs from nature.  In other words, nature is the benchmark against which we compare an object to see if it is designed.

For example, many naturally occurring rock fragments just happen to have a sharp edge that is well-suited for serving the purpose of chopping meat, though this does not lead us to believe that these fragments were designed.  Yet, we have found clearly manufactured prehistoric chopping and cutting stones that were designed.  How do we know they were designed and not just examples of fortuitous rock fractures?  Clearly it is not because they are sharp, since naturally occurring rocks are also sharp; and not because they are complex, since they have neither parts nor complexity; and not because they serve a purpose, since obviously random events can make a rock very sharp.  We know these stone hand axes were designed because they have markings on them that differ from what one would find in nature—that is, they have signs of manufacture.

Because the proper criterion for establishing design is difference from nature, and not complexity or apparent usefulness, we can know that something was designed even when it is both extremely simple and has no identifiable purpose at all. ''

''we don’t know something is intelligently designed because it shows complexity; we know it is designed because it shows signs of manufacture, and the only way we know something is manufactured is by comparing it with nature or by having direct experience of its manufacture.  Now, if the criterion for determining design is comparison with nature, then it makes no sense to apply that criterion to nature itself since nature provides the very benchmark for making the comparison.''