Scientific Proof God Doesnt Exist!

[toff]

this long agument about god exsiting and not or thats has gone on forever....its ********
i dont say i beleieve in god and i dnt say i dont believe in god, in fact, i dont talk about god anyway
but you people are so dumb
if some people want to believe in a god, let them its their life and its not hurting you
if you dont they should let you and for the most part they do.
instead of arguing over something that no one gonna prove anytime soon


why not go change the world for the better?

Many people believe that getting others to believe in god (or getting others to stop believing in god) IS changing the world for the better.

Oh, and by the way, you're unlikely to get good responses to a post in which you call the entire thread's posters "dumb".

 

[JohnCJ]

this long agument about god exsiting and not or thats has gone on forever....its ********
i dont say i beleieve in god and i dnt say i dont believe in god, in fact, i dont talk about god anyway
but you people are so dumb
if some people want to believe in a god, let them its their life and its not hurting you
if you dont they should let you and for the most part they do.
instead of arguing over something that no one gonna prove anytime soon


why not go change the world for the better?

To post on any forum please stay on topic, have a point to a post, don't call people dumb..
kthnxby

 

[BlackAnarchist]

God Doesnt Exist

Nature and reality are congruent words, nature is reality, reality is nature. All that exists is real, and all that is real exists. Everything that is real is governed by nature, it is nature. From every dimension, to every black hole, hypernova, solar flare and gravity. If something does not exist, it is not real. Therefore if it exists, it becomes part of reality, ergo nature.

So if something "supernatural," were to exist, by its own definition is illogical and non-existant, it would no longer be "supernatural," merely natural. That which does not exist is intangible [I.e. A concept] It cannot exist, being logically impossible.

Reality = A / Nature = B | Ergo: A = B, B = A

In order for somthing to cause itself, it must preceed itself. Nothing preceeds itself. Therefore, it is illogical for somthing to cause itself. Q.E.D.

If God exists, that means that it is part of nature. If it's part of nature, it is not supernatural. Also, as something which exists, it cannot be inconsistent. There is nothing that is tangible that is inconsistent.

For example, A being which is omnipotent must be illogical. Can a God make a rock bigger than he can lift? If so, then he would be unable to lift it. If not, he wouldnt be able to create one bigger than he could not lift.

Therefore god would be bound by the laws of logic. I.e., God is a natural entity which had a beginning and cannot do the impossible. A "God" that had a beginning, could not do the impossible, sounds alot like me, a human being. Nor would this God be omniscient, omnipresent... God(s) Can only exist as a concept, like invisible pink unicorns.

Through all of the contradictions in the bibles, and illogical claims, such as Jesus rising from the dead, meaning millions of people worship a 2,000 year old jew zombie nailed to two peices of wood... Magical trees, talking snakes, etc... God simply does not exist.

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

Why would anyone worship a deity that supposedly has the power to stop 40,000 children from dying of starvation every day, yet doesnt?

It was a picture of a black woman in Northern Africa. They were experiencing a devastating drought. And she was holding her dead baby in her arms and looking up to heaven with the most forlorn expression. I looked at it and thought, "Is it possible to believe that there is a loving or caring Creator when all this woman needed was rain?" [Charles Templeton, former evangelist, referring to a picture in Time Magazine, when asked by Lee Strobel when he realized he lost his faith]

Think of how many people have died for an "all loving" deity... Just in the christian religion alone! The holocaust, the inquisition, crusades, waco texas, salem witch trials, massacre of wounded knee, trail of tears, cortes and montezumo, the list goes on and on.

Were any deities listening to the prayers of a small boy asking for help while he was being molested by a priest?

You must consider that since a casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith proves nothing. It proves everything equally, from 2+2=5 to "God exists because I have faith." It's an inane concept without justification. Two hands working do more than an infinite amount clasped in prayer.

Wake up people, Gods dont exist!

 

[lucaspa]

God Doesnt Exist

Nature and reality are congruent words, nature is reality, reality is nature. All that exists is real, and all that is real exists. Everything that is real is governed by nature, it is nature. From every dimension, to every black hole, hypernova, solar flare and gravity. If something does not exist, it is not real. Therefore if it exists, it becomes part of reality, ergo nature.

So if something "supernatural," were to exist, by its own definition is illogical and non-existant, it would no longer be "supernatural," merely natural. That which does not exist is intangible [I.e. A concept] It cannot exist, being logically impossible.

Nice semantic game, but it doesn't work. While everything real exists, not everything real must be part of nature. You are presupposing that natural is all there is. But that is the very subject under discussion: is there something beyond what we call "nature"? So your post is an exercise in circular reasoning.

In order for somthing to cause itself, it must preceed itself. Nothing preceeds itself. Therefore, it is illogical for somthing to cause itself. Q.E.D.

Sorry, but that doesn't follow. In any chain of cause and effect, there must be a point where you have an Uncaused Cause to kick the chain off. Now, on the quantum level, what causes the wave function to collapse? There is no cause; it just happens.

If God exists, that means that it is part of nature.

That does not follow. It works only if you define "nature" such that "nature" is all that exists. But that, again, is the very point under discussion. Is nature all that exists? You can't presuppose the answer.

For example, A being which is omnipotent must be illogical. Can a God make a rock bigger than he can lift? If so, then he would be unable to lift it. If not, he wouldnt be able to create one bigger than he could not lift.

I agree. However, all that this does is open the question: How powerful does an entity have to be to qualify as God? I submit that God does not have to be any of the omni's to be God.

Therefore god would be bound by the laws of logic. I.e., God is a natural entity which had a beginning and cannot do the impossible. A "God" that had a beginning, could not do the impossible, sounds alot like me, a human being. Nor would this God be omniscient, omnipresent... God(s) Can only exist as a concept, like invisible pink unicorns.

By your logic, invisible pink unicorns can't exist. Think about it.

However, what you are doing here is violating one of the cardinal rules of science:
"...what we learned in school about the scientific method can be reduced to two basic principles.
"1. All our theory, ideas, preconceptions, instincts, and prejudices about how things logically ought to be, how they in all fairness ought to be, or how we would prefer them to be, must be tested against external reality --what they *really* are. How do we determine what they really are? Through direct experience of the universe itself. "
Logic does not determine reality. The Greeks found this out, which is why their science died stillborn. Nothing in the quantum world is "logical", but it still exists. What you have here is simply bad science.

Through all of the contradictions in the bibles, and illogical claims, such as Jesus rising from the dead,

The claims are not illogical. Do you know the difference between data and theory?

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

He is able but cannot without violating a more important concept. Are you a parent? If so, do you prevent all evil from happening to your kids? If not, why not? Answer that and you go a long way to figuring out the "problem of evil".

Why would anyone worship a deity that supposedly has the power to stop 40,000 children from dying of starvation every day, yet doesnt?

Because He doesn't cause the children to starve. We do.

Think of how many people have died for an "all loving" deity... Just in the christian religion alone! The holocaust, the inquisition, crusades, waco texas, salem witch trials, massacre of wounded knee, trail of tears, cortes and montezumo, the list goes on and on.

Poor argument. This is what people do, not God. The flip side is how many people died for the ideals of atheism? Stalin's purges, the Cultural Revolution, Pol Pot, etc, etc. Humans have a lot of blood on their hands. They use whatever rationalization they can find for doing what they want to do.

Were any deities listening to the prayers of a small boy asking for help while he was being molested by a priest?

Yes. And the comfort was available to the small boy from God. But you want a God that intervenes as a puppetmaster into our lives so that our lives are going to be nicey-nice all the time. We have a name for parents who do that: control freaks. And we label them as bad parents. Sorry, but you can't have it both ways. You can have freedom or you can have security, but you can't have both. I choose freedom. You can run for the security blanket if you want.

Wake up people, Gods dont exist!

You know, in all this you never posted the peer-reviewed scientific paper showing this. You would think that, since science studies nature and falsifies entities all the time, that you would have such a paper. Where is it?

 

[Data]

Wake up people, Gods dont exist!

Look, that's not science, it doesn't belong here.

This thread belongs on general apologetics, because as it is, God cannot be proved wrong with science, and no-one has produced any science so far to show that it has. End of story.

 

[DJ_Ghost]

Scientific Proof God Doesnt Exist!

My first complaint is with your title. You invoke the work “Science” and then provide us with a philosophical and not a scientific argument. You use the word “Prove” but provide no actual proof.

Look you can question my belief in God all you like, I can cope with that, but please please don’t do this to science, I can’t bear to watch!

Starting things off...
"hey! where did God Come from?!"
"he was always there"
"always there huh? and he created us when"
"a few thousand years ago"

Bzzt! Mistake number one. Very few Christians believe in a young creation. This is a fairly minor niggled compared to those about to follow, but if you are going to argue against a position and claim the title of science then do science the courtesy of knowing what it is you are arguing against.

"and was god around for even a second before he mad ehte earth and man?"
"yeah"
"thank you"
ok think of a time line....
<------------------------------------------------------->
theres your time line...Now God always was so therefore he is Always at the beginning of this time line
<god><-------------------------------------------------->

Now god decides to create earth at say....year 0

<god><----------------------------<0>------------------->

now this is where your gonna have to use your brain to imagine what im talking about but...

Now god has to reach that year <0> so that he can create the world. And since god lived forever...he must then travel an infinite amount of time to reach the time that he created the world(or <0>)

I am afraid you don’t seem to have grasped time properly here. Or science for that matter. And certainly not the concept of proof. The point zero of time is “the big bang” the creation of the universe of space-time. Time is after all a dimension and not, as some people would have it, a human construct. Read up on Relativity for a more expansive explanation of this. Now, we can not know with any certainty what occurred or existed prior to the Big Bang. The question has been asked many times and the answer is always the same “We do not know”. Now a Theist will say “I believe it to have been God” but in the end he isn’t able to prove it empirically any more than any other hypothesis about what came before the big bang can be proven, why? Because its an untreatable, and therefore remains a metaphysical concept.

So every year that god waits to reach <0> he doesnt acheive any movement because he is infinitely far away from it....

No because time does not exist yet, so your whole idea is based on a false premise.

So there ya go....God Cant have existed forever due to that simple demonstration.

That is not scientific proof, thats a philosophical argument. Can it be subject to empirical and physical testing? No, therefore it is a metaphysical statement. You can not elevate a metaphysical statement to the status of scientific fact, no matter how logical it seems to you. For a statement to be scientific fact it must be testable and the results of the test must be in a form that can be experienced by the senses of a conscious observer. You have not provided a scientific statement never mind proven it.

Next...If god didnt exist forever, then he must have been created at some point, or created himself....But if god created himself whats to have stopped the big bang from occuring..

What does that have to do with it? Most Christians do not deny the big bang.

.Well anyway, how does something create itself..? It would then mean that there was nothing in the universe, therefor no universe. Now what is more believable, a small speck of energy is cerated out of nothing, or an all supreme being is created from nothing...

Neither one is entirely believable, neither one can be empirically tested, neither one can therefore be proven, and either one is therefore a metaphysical concept that can not be elevated to the level of scientific fact.

In my opinion neither is believable, the most you can get from nothing...is nothing...so then this means that we technically do not exist in the means we believe we do. Like the Morpheus says in the Matrix, "What is Real? something you can touch? see? feel?" well we can touch see and feel things, but i think that it isnt matter that were touching, it couldnt possibly be, since the universe could not have started with anything in it, and thus still has nothing in it...So what are we? i dunno..................an idea? a thought? but whos idea? whoa, a big circle.....ah well well probably never udnerstand it

Again this is a philosophical argument and not a scientific one. You can not construct a philosophical argument that is directly counter the scientific bedrock assumption that we do exist and our senses process actual physical data, and then claim legitimacy for it by calling it scientific. It isn’t. You are making metaphysical statements, as such they can not be elevated to the level of fact and they can not be proven.

In short, your argument is not a scientific one, it is a philosophical and metaphysical one, so please do not claim it as “scientific proof” of anything, it is neither.

Ghost

 

[lucaspa]

Look, that's not science, it doesn't belong here.

This thread belongs on general apologetics, because as it is, God cannot be proved wrong with science, and no-one has produced any science so far to show that it has. End of story.

I think it should be here. After all, what we are doing is showing that science doesn't say what militant atheists says it says. Just like we are showing that science falsifies a young earth.

We need to show the scientific fallacies of the argument. Then, if anyone wants, they can take these scientific fallacies back to Apologetics.

 

[comesoon]

Yes I believe God is outside time (as we know it)
Yes man created time as in 1 minute 1 hour etc but God created TIME itself!!

He is an awesome God !!!- and we must never think that we can understand everything!

but there is no reason not to try to understand as much as we can,

... just bare in mind we are the created and hence will never be able to prove GOD or know all the answers!

 

[The Bellman]

He is able but cannot without violating a more important concept. Are you a parent? If so, do you prevent all evil from happening to your kids? If not, why not? Answer that and you go a long way to figuring out the "problem of evil".

The lamest defence against the problem of evil. The analogy fails because human parents are not omnipotent. God is. Parents allow their children to suffer evil for a variety of reasons...most notably, because that can be a good way for them to learn. However, any parent who would let their child suffer evil when he COULD teach him the same lesson withOUT allowing him to suffer is a bad parent - just like this "god".

And the comfort was available to the small boy from God. But you want a God that intervenes as a puppetmaster into our lives so that our lives are going to be nicey-nice all the time. We have a name for parents who do that: control freaks. And we label them as bad parents. Sorry, but you can't have it both ways. You can have freedom or you can have security, but you can't have both. I choose freedom. You can run for the security blanket if you want.

No, I believe the poster "wants" a god who does just what the average parent would do - prevents harm from coming to their child when they can. What do we call a parent who intervenes to keep their child from coming to harm when they can? We call them a "good parent".

And the false dichotomy of freedom vs security is just that - a false dichotomy. It's one of the lame excuses theists have used to avoid the problem of evil for a long while, now.

 

[lucaspa]

The analogy fails because human parents are not omnipotent. God is. Parents allow their children to suffer evil for a variety of reasons...most notably, because that can be a good way for them to learn. However, any parent who would let their child suffer evil when he COULD teach him the same lesson withOUT allowing him to suffer is a bad parent - just like this "god".

Within the lives of our children, we can be nearly omnipotent. That is, we can make all the decisions for them and structure their lives such that they can never encounter anything that would harm them. Howver, if we do that it's not that the child can't learn, but that the child's life has no meaning. They are merely our puppets. And, when parents are control freaks and make children their puppets, we call them bad parents.

Now, what you keep forgetting that if God controls things such that nothing bad ever happens, then He must equally control you such that you only do good things. It's not just "preventing evil", but actively controlling everyone's lives. That's not a deity anymore, but a puppetmaster. And my life is no longer mine. In order for my life to have meaning, I must be free to make my own decisions and those decisions must have real consequences. Just like my daughter had to be free to decide to choose her residence as an adult. And her boyfriend was mugged in that neighborhood. Sure, I could have forced her to live at home, but then she was a puppet.

For my life to have meaning, if I make an "evil" decision, that decision has consequences. Otherwise, if God steps in and makes sure any decision of mine that is "evil" won't hurt anyone, it is my life that is being robbed of meaning. You may want to live in that kind of protected world, but I don't.

No, I believe the poster "wants" a god who does just what the average parent would do - prevents harm from coming to their child when they can. What do we call a parent who intervenes to keep their child from coming to harm when they can? We call them a "good parent".

Not always. You can't always protect your kids. That's a control freak again.

And the false dichotomy of freedom vs security is just that - a false dichotomy.

Really? Then look around. Since 9/11 we have traded freedom for security. We have greater security, but less freedom. Our e-mail can not be tapped legally; we are required to show proof of ID to fly and are subject to person and baggage search; I can no longer take my Swiss Army knife on a plane; I am refused entrance to some buildings because I don't have the required ID; I can't enter the Statue of Liberty. The list goes on and on.

Bellman, please test your claims before you post them.

 

[lucaspa]

He is an awesome God !!!- and we must never think that we can understand everything!

but there is no reason not to try to understand as much as we can,

... just bare in mind we are the created and hence will never be able to prove GOD or know all the answers!

1. You are stating your belief as tho it is fact. If that is wrong for atheists it is just as wrong for theists.
2. Well, understanding as much as we can has lead to our understanding that God created thru evolution, not creationism.
3. Right now we can't prove or disprove the existence of God by science. I think it rather presumptuous that you speak for all time and all evidence. Especially since, as a Fundamentalist, you believe in the End Times when such proof is supposed to be available!

 

[lucaspa]

The lamest defence against the problem of evil. ... It's one of the lame excuses theists have used to avoid the problem of evil for a long while, now.

If you think the argument is wrong, then simply demonstrate it. One of the sure signs that a reasonable response is lacking is a resort to ad hominen. Just a tip.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

I new he was a Matrix fan!

 

[lucaspa]

I new he was a Matrix fan!

Who's "he"?

 

[dnich163]

Starting things off...
"hey! where did God Come from?!"

Aagh, pretty old hat this. Even in the middle ages the theologians, mystics, men of God and Science accepted that God can't be proven or disproven by science....He is of spiritual things alone.

David

 

[RYGAR]

Oh Yes He Does

 

[larry lunchpail]

well now, that was certainly worth digging up this old thread. oh yes who does what?

 

[RYGAR]

www dot shroud.com jesus cloth which he was wraped in after he was resurected left an imprinted image on the shroud that is proof !

go look at that site reguardless all haft to believe without seeing

and il tell you a story now you were born example july 17 1979 8am now
during that day july 17 1979 8am there are 5 6 kids in the world being born at the same time one in china
one in russia one in usa exact time and say now
how is it you came out of the body which you were in you could of been born from another country at 8am
now remember your parents make the body right
now how is it that you were born at usa that you could of been a chinese person
or etc ~ cause god choose your spirt to be placed in your body now you have

now another thing

~ nothing void emptyness non existance blank
what comes out if it ~ same thing nothing void non existance Blank
non aliveness no movement right

now there is
~ a presence an existance a movement a being there mode a working < from this comes happenings and creation ~

compare a rock and compare a person ~

person builds n etc
a rock doesnt move

if there was nothing around you would have not been born in the first place nor any of this appear

cause there was a force and something was here ~ that has caused you to been born now if there was nothing then the nothing would be around
.............

 

[RYGAR]

www dot shroud.com jesus cloth which he was wraped in after he was resurected left an imprinted image on the shroud that is proof !

go look at that site reguardless all haft to believe without seeing

and il tell you a story now you were born example july 17 1979 8am now
during that day july 17 1979 8am there are 5 6 kids in the world being born at the same time one in china
one in russia one in usa exact time and say now
how is it you came out of the body which you were in you could of been born from another country at 8am
now remember your parents make the body right
now how is it that you were born at usa that you could of been a chinese person
or etc ~ cause god choose your spirt to be placed in your body now you have

now another thing

~ nothing void emptyness non existance blank
what comes out if it ~ same thing nothing void non existance Blank
non aliveness no movement right

now there is
~ a presence an existance a movement a being there mode a working < from this comes happenings and creation ~

compare a rock and compare a person ~

person builds n etc
a rock doesnt move

if there was nothing around you would have not been born in the first place nor any of this appear

cause there was a force and something was here ~ that has caused you to been born now if there was nothing then the nothing would be around
............. email me rastar77@hotmail.com names RYGAR

 

[sumerland3]

first off your making the mistake of assuming that because God created us in time he exists in it. time is a totally natural thing of our universe, it isnt a human concept its real and it came about at the begining of our universe. when the universe was created time was created, did God exist before that? well you cant really ask that question because you cant use the word "before" because there was no time beforehand. so since time does not apply to God and by simple reasoning of cause and effect that causes come before effects you can say that although a time before the universe didnt exist it can be said that God existed before the universe because he caused it and must have preceded it.