How to prove God exists.

[Radrook]

No, how many times do people have to explain that without a testable hypothesis by definition one does not have any scientific evidence. What is the supposed testable hypothesis that this evidence confirms?

No test is needed to conclude that there is something which they have tagged dark matter, is gravitationally affecting the stars-correct?. If I demanded a test to justify that necessary, initial, logical conclusion based on observation and repetitive pattern, I would be tagged irrational-right? Why? Because the conclusion based on observation is justifiable. In short, its justifiability is a given. In a similar manner, we conclude that nature displays mind due to complex organization of towards a goal or purpose. That to us is a given.

Once they concluded that SOMETHING was affecting the stars gravitationally they proceeded to test and see what it's possible nature could be. That's because that something only revealed itself via a simple effect-gravity and revealed nothing more. So testing to determine more about it became essential.

That is the crucial difference between what we observe, an organizing mind, and what was observed in reference to Dark Matter, simple gravitational effects.

 

[Radrook]

Do you expect us to return this compliment?

Not if you feel otherwise inclined.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Dear Loudmouth, I like to have a sustained exchange with you.

You see, you want evidence for God existing, that is a legitimate demand.

Now, you say that my concept of God, namely, that God in concept is first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning, is to you a belief.

Okay, that is very good from your part, about my concept of God is a belief.

Is that all right with you that we will call that concept above of God as a belief concept?

So, let us go together into the objective realm of reality which is the universe and man and everything that has a beginning; all these things are outside our mind and outside of belief concepts in our mind.

We will look for evidence in all these things, which evidence will validate the belief concept, namely, of the concept of God, as first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning, that the belief concept is true, is a fact, is according to logic, and supported in the history of ideas.

And wherefore God exists.

Is that all right with you?

To me, you're not making any sense. Mostly, I see much obfuscation and vagueness.

In any case, I have a question: what do you mean by "a beginning" in the sentence "everything that has a beginning"?

Because in this universe, not much, if anything, could be said to have a physical "beginning". Conceptual beginnings - sure. My personhood for example, began to exist when I was born.

But the materials that my body is made of, did not begin to exist with me.
In terms of "physical beginning" - pretty much everything in this universe is no more or less then reconfigurations/recombinations of pre-existing matter.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I actually have a clue, that you don't have a clue

Do you know what's that? Thats' your hair follicle. It's called Flagellum Motor. And it's an engine. AN ENGINE. A rotary type mechanism which has a specific purpose.

So you are telling me that cosmic dust MADE THAT, BY MISTAKE?

You need to read more about biology I guess.

Not by mistake. By natural selection.

For example:

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Why monkeys don't evolve now? Why nothing evolves now?

What makes you think evolution has stopped?
Evolution will continue for as long as there are living systems that reproduce with variation and are in competition with eachother for limited resources.

This is not X-men you know. Mutants does not exist.

Actually, every new born of any species has a set of mutations. How many on average per individual can varry from species to species. It is called the "mutation rate".

You have them too, you know.

And even if stuff evolved, how did this evolved into a perfect mechanism?

I wouldn't use the word "perfect". But in any case: through natural selection. It's quite efficient at discarding the unfit in favor of the fit.

You saw the photo. You're speechless right now because you can't explain to me how something would evolve with a perfect symmetry.

Actually, quite a lot is known about the evolution of the flagellum and other such things.

And just fyi: if no explanation is known at this time, that means that no explanation is known at this time. Which is not a free pass to just make something up.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You know very good that German cars are engineered to precision with machines. It takes lots of time, lots of people and machines to make something fit perfect and work as intended. You can't just evolve a BMW. LOL.

Cars aren't living organisms that reproduce with variation and which aren't in competition with one another for limited resources. So why would cars be subject to evolutionary processes?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No test is needed to conclude that there is something which they have tagged dark matter, is gravitationally affecting the stars-correct?

You can actually detect and measure this effect.

If I demanded a test to justify that necessary, initial, logical conclusion based on observation and repetitive pattern, I would be tagged irrational-right? Why? Because the conclusion based on observation is justifiable. In short, its justifiability is a given. In a similar manner, we conclude that nature displays mind due to complex organization of towards a goal or purpose. That to us is a given.

No, that is not similar at all.
You are just claiming "design". There is nothing being measured or detected here.

Once they concluded that SOMETHING was affecting the stars gravitationally they proceeded to test and see what it's possible nature could be. That's because that something only revealed itself via a simple effect-gravity and revealed nothing more.

Yep. It revealed itself through something that is objectively and independently measureable and detectable.

Unlike "design", which is merely claimed.

That is the crucial difference between what we observe, an organizing mind,

False. No such "organizing mind" is being observed anywhere. It is merely claimed to be present.

and what was observed in reference to Dark Matter, simple gravitational effects.

And the gravitational effects are right there... measurable, detectable and quantifiable in unambigous ways.

 

[KCfromNC]

You yourself is evidence that an ID exists.

It is posts like this which force people to conclude that you don't know what the word evidence means.

 

[Zurückschlagen]

I am speechless because I have never seen such an utter lack of knowledge.

Everything is still evolving. You have over 50 mutations in the DNA that your parents gave you.

Negative mutations, destroying our DNA. It's not building, but falling down. Are you sure I'm the one that lacks knowledge?

 

[KCfromNC]

No test is needed to conclude that there is something which they have tagged dark matter, is gravitationally affecting the stars-correct?

No, not correct. See e.g. [0812.4005] Review of Observational Evidence for Dark Matter in the Universe and in upcoming searches for Dark Stars

 

[AV1611VET]

It is posts like this which force people to conclude that you don't know what the word evidence means.

That door swings both ways.

The next time you see someone say there's no evidence for God, remind them it's AD 2017.

(It's more ironic if you are standing in front of a church, where people are in there singing NOEL, and a car is going by with a bumper sticker that says GOD IS MY PILOT, and there's a Bible on the front seat.)

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Negative mutations, destroying our DNA.

No.

Are you sure I'm the one that lacks knowledge?

Ow yes, that much is extremely obvious.

 

[Zurückschlagen]

OK, I guess I'm already Wolverine. Should I call Stryker so he can give me my Adamantium?

 

[Radrook]

That door swings both ways.

The next time you see someone say there's no evidence for God, remind them it's AD 2017.

(It's more ironic if you are standing in front of a church, where people are in there singing NOEL, and a car is going by with a bumper sticker that says GOD IS MY PILOT, and there's a Bible on the front seat.)

More ironic still if he plows into the church singers because of a mechanical malfunction.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No test is needed to conclude that there is something which they have tagged dark matter, is gravitationally affecting the stars-correct?. If I demanded a test to justify that necessary, initial, logical conclusion based on observation and repetitive pattern, I would be tagged irrational-right? Why? Because the conclusion based on observation is justifiable. In short, its justifiability is a given. In a similar manner, we conclude that nature displays mind due to complex organization of towards a goal or purpose. That to us is a given.

Why on Earth do you think that there are not tests for that? Don't project your lack upon others.

Once they concluded that SOMETHING was affecting the stars gravitationally they proceeded to test and see what it's possible nature could be. That's because that something only revealed itself via a simple effect-gravity and revealed nothing more. So testing to determine more about it became essential.

Right, and their thoughts were confirmed. They found a test for it

That is the crucial difference between what we observe, an organizing mind, and what was observed in reference to Dark Matter, simple gravitational effects.

Yes, and there are ways to test for that. You still have not explained your lack of tests for your nonsense. You still have no evidence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

OK, I guess I'm already Wolverine. Should I call Stryker so he can give me my Adamantium?

Thanks for confirming the fact that you are not a biologist.

 

[Zurückschlagen]

Ein Grafiker.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Negative mutations, destroying our DNA. It's not building, but falling down. Are you sure I'm the one that lacks knowledge?

Yes, absolutely. What percentage of mutations do you think are negative. And why did you lie about being a micro-biologist? No biologist would make the grade-school level errors that you have here.

 

[Zurückschlagen]

You clearly didn't see the "Joking" part in the post. It's still there you know. But nobody to see it.

Could you tell me who made the discovery that we're mutating, and can you show me his research. Not some article written by Mr. KeyboardWarrior, but a real research wit lab tests.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You clearly didn't see the "Joking" part in the post. It's still there you know. But nobody to see it.

Could you tell me who made the discovery that we're mutating, and can you show me his research. Not some article written by Mr. KeyboardWarrior, but a real research wit lab tests.

It was late at night and I missed it.

As for your request here is a Wiki article on the subject. You can follow the links to the peer reviewed papers it was based upon:

Mutation rate - Wikipedia