Bitcoin Forum

The Creator or God is largely an incomprehensible embodiment of intelligence and life forms, in the planet Earth, are allowed sufficient time to be intelligent enough to understand the broad design of the cosmic evolution and investigate the creation of life and survival of the mankind in our planet, thereby empowering them to find the foot-print of the Creator.

Please read on and leave your comment - God is Reality (http://upalc.com/creator-of-intelligent-life-in-universe.php)

A self-moderated thread about religion, this sounds swell.

what are you, some sect guru? :)

I think life was created by a universe - without any god, without any creator - people cannot understand the power of the universe and they cannot just believe that this was all done just by happening - without any god.

It is much easier to believe that god exist and he creates us all.. it is very easy.

Harder is to find another answer and prove it.
When you talk about a god you don't need to prove anything - because god is the god ... :)

So ... I am so sorry I think a footprint of a creator is a sound of a big bang that is spreading through whole universe! :]

ps. ahh .. I didn't saw that this is self moderated thread ... too bad :)

I prefer self-moderated thread to counter thread hijacking.


I wish u read the article once. The article discusses about creation of life especially a certain protein evolution which is still not possible in laboratory. There are some other points given which forms the pillar of the thought that there is/was an existence of something supernatural. It has nothing to do with any religion... not a single word.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis  ::)

Hundreds of scientists that have dedicated their entire lives all in agreement with each over the possible theories that explain different ways of proteins and everything forming

vs

a single guy with a few hours of research into a topic that started with bias thoughts from the start

No one really know what happen.

Believing it either way should be considered bias.

That's the thing a lot of people don't really understand about science. Scientist don't skew the results to prove their ideas. They find the facts, and present them as that. A lot of scientists are wrong about their original ideas, and they're okay with it. There's nothing wrong with being wrong as a scientist. Sure, you may have just wasted the last 15 years trying to prove a hypothesis that you had, but in reality, you just saved the next guy some work.

Three letters

L S D

God is a cunt.

You are god.


God is not incomprehensible imo.

Well , self moderated threads are great when you are trying to stay on topic , when discussing your product or website or idea.

But a theory or opinion should not really be self moderated. This means he can delete any post that goes against his point and the small banner showing that this is self moderated makes any argument he makes pointless , because any valid counter-argument has been deleted.

God is our Eternal Parents, origin of universe and source of love :)

Speaking of god, the loyal disciples who believe so much in him/her.

Make movies of him and make millions of dollars. lol.

or open a big ass church, then probably accept bitcoin for every sunday donation w. the QR code.

To be fair, he hasn't deleted ANY of our posts yet, it seems. Maybe it is self-moderated to keep the trolls at bay.

I think  its better to self moderate such threads as sometimes they go out of control.This way OP should have control on things.

1. I am an atheist. I dont believe in the god that resides in the temple/church/mosque. But I believe in the arguments put forward by Sir Stephen Hawking in The Grand Design (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Design_(book)).

2. Hundreds of scientists have dedicated their lives for alchemy. That does not make it a science. Except nuclear fusion mercury does not turn into gold in any chemical reaction.

3. Abiogenesis is not a science. It is a hypothesis to make up for a missing link of the creation of life. Abiogenesis never took place in any laboratory till date. Here is a detailed discussion - http://www.sciforums.com/I-need-conclusive-proof-of-Abiogenesis-t-109880.html

4. If u read the article u'll know that it does not talk about the god u worship in daily life. It talks about some missing link that only something supernatural can explain.

p.s. I am repeating again. The thread is not moderated to delete any counter argument. It is to keep it clean from troll. Rather I welcome counter arguments and would love reply to any solid logical post to tear me down.

reality is an illusion. Let go

+1. nothing is real until everything is real.

1. That would make you an agnostic rather than an atheist. To be fair, that doesn't really have much to do with what we were discussing.

2. The fact that they follow a scientfic method makes it science. These alchemist didn't -- they used every trick in the book to make it look like 'real' science. Alchemy was a foundation to chemistry, however from these people's mistakes, we've learned that alchemy isn't just possible (with the exception as you mentioned of nuclear fission / fusion)

3. Yeah, expect that thread is from 2011. That's 3 years ago -- just recently, abiogenesis has taken place in a lab: http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/sciences-greatest-unsolved-mysteries-creating-life#slide-4.

4. "Supernatural"... right there ends that for me. If it talks about some missing link that can't currently be explained because we just don't know yet, I'm fine with that. But accepting an answer as "it's just supernatural / god did it" pisses me off. Humans thought "the sun moving around the earth" was supernatural, and they were wrong in almost every aspect. How can you explain the sun moving around the earth? There's no giant horses pulling it, there's no giant rope pulling it, it MUST be supernatural, right?

Even if the author of the text isn't you, since the site seems to be yours (have your nick), why not just paste the text here? Are you looking to increase the traffic of your site?

People usually don't like to click links to obscure sites, especially if they have an wallet in their computer.

On the issue of the thread being self-moderated and on apparent religious issues, I already posted: This is a bitcoin forum, supposedly here "No one expects the (spanish) inquisition". (for the young ones, this is a famous quote from the comedians Monty Python).

The topic is posted under the sub-section off-topic. It absolutely fits here. This sub-section is fine for non-bitcoin discussions that may interest bitcoiners and the subject 'GOD' falls under this category.

Of course, religious issues are an excellent subject for this part of the forum.

My point was about the thread being self-moderated.

creator?  u mean someone had to have sex first.  f*ck that

God is one !
“We are not necessarily doubting that God will do the best for us; we are wondering how painful the best will turn out to be.”

I opened your link, pressed CTRL+F and wrote abiogenesis ...nothing came up !!!


This article talks about creating digital life ...not an organic body that shows the characteristics of life. So, abiogenesis is still a hypothesis ....now whether that accounts for the very existence of God is a different question altogether.

I've seen and done the supernatural.  It is natural.

words are just words and God and Allah are just words.  it's funny how much emphasis people put on evil, and devilish spirits

And your point? Just because you can't find THE EXACT words that you want to be shoved down your throat doesn't mean the entire point isn't there.

There is a second part of my post explaining why it does not deal with abiogenesis. Read that again => https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=635960.msg7116190#msg7116190

God is love, creator and absolute power and energy!

Welcome to planet Earth ;]

It seems the op deserted on us, not even something deleted...

Not even the inquisition is still the same, times really changed... for the better :)

Dank go to the monastery and meditate there the rest of your life. Travel to another dimension through your mind. Umm.. sounds fun? And what books do you read? You do according to your speeches  ;D  What's your favorite philosopher?

There are many facts that do support a god.There are many facts out there that do support a god and in particular Jesus Christ.
Also there are many sources that back up the bible and Jesus. Outside sources validate many facts the bible states. But it is your own journey. However in a matter that is considered life or death, eternal life or eternal condemnation, wouldn't u want to know all the facts. I encourage all those questioning if god is real to check out Lee Strobel and his books. Particularly a case for Christ which was written when he was an atheist.

If Jesus had to appear to Paul in order for him to convert (allowing him to convert Christianity from a Jewish sect into an universal religion), why shouldn't the atheists have the same opportunity. Aren't we all created as equals under the image of god?

Let him appear in all his glory in CNN and speak to the world.

I like these threads - lets me know which accounts not to take seriously when they post.

every time i see these types of threads, i immediately think of dank.. and it's to my surprise that it's not him.

God is the universe vod.  You are part of the universe.  To not believe in god is to believe in negativity, falsity and basically satan, that which is a negatively opposite god.

Coming from a former atheist.

You are one account that nobody takes seriously when you post.  You ignore reality.  Your god and satan do not exist to normal, sane people.

You seem to take me quite seriously considering you constantly follow me around and troll me.

God is positivity, satan is negativity.  Love, hate.  Light, dark.  Soul, ego.  Everything, nothing.  etc.

If those don't exist then perhaps you should tap into your mind a little further.

And the 90% of the world that believes in god.  I guess they're all just crazy for believing in love and not worshiping matter.

I have to say this was a pretty good post
Hope I don't get neg trusted for agreeing with dank in off topic section

There was a time that more than 90% of the people believed the world was flat.  Yes, they were wrong, even though they were the overwhelming majority.  As education spreads, the belief in fairy tales drops in normal, healthy minds.  This is why I don't blame you for what you believe, as your mind is damaged beyond repair, as proven recently when your parents paid for some very good medical help.

God doesn't exist.  Satan doesn't exist.  "Everything" doesn't exist.  Taking you seriously does not exist.  You won't ever understand this, but it doesn't make it less real, same as the earth being round.

You and dank should get along.  He's a scammer as well!   ;)

Please enlighten me as to how non existence can exist vod.

Can you tell me/anyone how to communicate with you?

Everything anyone posts is just met with "because it is god and you are god".

When I post something seriously for your benefit, I have doubts you can understand it, because that is how you portray yourself - as a fool.   :-\

If something doesn't exist, then you can say it has non existence. 

You didn't answer me.  How does something not exist?  Please fathom that out for me.

If non existence does not exist then please explain how something does not exist?

Something does not exist if it does not exist.  For example, I don't have a two headed dog.  It does not exist.

"Non existence" is describing something that does not exist.  The description is what exists.

Understand?

If it doesn't exist how did you think of it?  You connected to the reality where it does exist.

There are infinite dimensions.  Non existence is impossible.

I thought of the phrase "non existence" because the phrase exists.  You can search the phrase on Google and come up with results.  The phrase "non existence" means something that does not exist.  i.e. My two headed pet is non existent.

I'm making it as simple as I can without taking psychology classes geared towards your disorder... so do you understand?

Edit:  using the word "impossible" implies that you do understand that some things cannot be.....

If it is something then it indeed exists because something is not nothing.

It is fallacious to think our tiny human perception can qualify or quantify everything that exists in our infinite universe.

We must dive beyond the conscious egoistic mind to comprehend the totality existence, and in that moment you would be experiencing egodeath or nirvana, which is everything, not nothing.

I don't need to quantify everything in our universe to state as a fact that I don't have a two headed dog.  A two headed Vod pet does not exist.


You're falling back into your garbage spew that only you can understand... you were doing so well having an actual conversation.  :(

So to get back on topic, do you understand how something can not exist?

You may perceive something to not exist in your reality, but it still exists.  A two headed vod pet exists in another parallel dimension.

We are multidimensional by our very nature.  We bend through time and space and are capable of dreaming.  We are multidimensional beings.

So we agree that in my reality, a two headed Vod pet does not exist, right?  It "may" exist elsewhere, but in my reality, and all those of sound mind, it does not exist.


Again, stop with the nonsense dank only talk.  Conversation requires communication that both parties can understand.

Back on topic, now that we agree that something can not exist in a specific reality, the term "non existence" has logical and actual meaning... right? 

I wouldn't call it non existence then.  I'd call it lack of perception or something of the likes.

Everything exists everywhere.

So you are saying *in my reality* a two headed dog, defying everything we know of physics, actually is sitting here but I can't perceive him/her for some dank reason?

If that is the argument you want to make, I guess that's an easy win for me.  :)


No - that is a conclusion you are drawing with no supporting evidence, like most of your posts.

With your failure to produce a counter argument, I guess I come out the "winner" in this discussion.

You can try again tomorrow night dank.  :)

They're called hallucinations.  People not on drugs/not crazy don't have them

Edit: 1000th post *throws confetti*

don't be a tardo.  you should understand by now that we're all recycled materials.  rise and fall to be born again. do something fulfilling for the common good and contribute a drop to the pool of knowledge.  that's the only thing you can leave behind anyway. your window of opportunity is just a razor thin slice of an endless road. ahh now that's relativity. ;)

religion is for the lesser mind. unable to define their path. fear of isolation and rejection. desperate to cling on to something. sadly most have no idea why they cling on in the first place.

when i ask myself if i were god, would i have shaped the world like this. with harmony, order, and dualism? puzzling questions, but the answers lie within all of us.  keep probing! :)

i feel its necessary for the human form, until we meet singularity for transcendence.

anyway, earth and mother-sun wont last forever. act now. life's a test. don't fail it.

If nothing is nothing then everything is everything.

It's very simple math vod, look at the polarity of the words.

No, it's not simple math, it's simple nonsense.   ;)  Did you even study math in your limited education?

Can't have a discussion with you when you turn into nonsense dank.  Come back tomorrow before you shoot up.  :)

Religions are meant to be a guide for people to find singularity within their self, though I agree that many are not used in the sense that the people who idealized them originally intended.

We should each look into ourself and find our own religion that makes sense to us.  This is spirituality and that is how one reaches a state of egodeath, nirvana, buddhahood.

The ascension is around the corner, I wouldn't want to miss out.  It just takes peace, it just takes faith and forgiveness and you'll have the ability to ascend into the infinitely positive feedback loop.


You're just a defamation troll vod.  I've never shot up anything into my body and I've told you this countless times.  All you're doing is proving me right with your untruthful posts.

What did anyone do to you to make you this way vod?

Actually no, I'm proving you wrong with facts.  :)

God is really real. God is good all the time.

Yes, newbies (with no reputation to lose) seem to post that all the time.  Do you have any facts, or are you another dank?

Vod, I feel sorry for you.

I understand why you feel this way.

You and I had a rational argument and you lost.

Your ego could not take the hit so your mind twisted the facts so that you won.

Telling me you feel sorry for me is your way of feeling good even after losing.

 :)

You are very lost.  I was there one day and I feel sorry for you because I know how much of a struggle I went through and the depression my negativity led to.

But I'm not lost.  I understand the successful path I am on and I embrace it!  I'm not depressed, I'm not negative, I'm not living in a motel without a family to care for me.

You seem to turn everything negative if it goes against your way of thinking.  Try sticking to the facts and promoting your agenda in a way the average person will understand - not the average stoner.

over my dead body

Should not create this thread in the first place.

Politic and religion open up for debate don't have good ending.

Yes, sometimes certain members end up with arguments ad hominem or even insults.

But if we won't argue about religion and politics, life will be very boring.

You must be fun at parties.

Why is bothering you so much if some people (a large percentage of the world)want to believe in God ,Allah etc?!People have the freedom to believe in something,and that doesn’t make the idiots or not to take in consideration. I understand that you believe that is no God and that is your opinion and probably no one can change it but stop calling others "mentally damaged" just because they don't share your opinions.

That's just it, reality is not up to personal preference.  Whether a person will be honest with themselves about what can be real and what cannot is a matter of preference, but what can be is not.  This is why people who are honest get so frustrated with people who aren't.  The following link sums up why it's improper to assert there is a God whilst insisting those who do not believe merely have a preference:

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof

Until this is resolved, any assertion of there existing a God is dishonest, and dishonest people are generally frowned upon in all areas except the one which the individual is being dishonest themselves (which is why atheists are always up-in-arms about it.)  The thing with religion is that people aren't told that it's dishonest; just the opposite, to assert that the given truth is not so will result in eternal damnation.  I'm certain bank robbers have a similar view; each member participating swears to uphold the asserted truth lest a terrible punishment ensue, the given truth being "We're all innocent."  It's not rational, it's fear-based, and we know that the truth is not a matter of consensus; the world was not flat because everyone thought it was, the sun did not revolve around the earth because it was popular opinion, and bank robbers aren't innocent because they believe themselves to be.  Yet we don't believe in those things, because people are brave enough to enforce a standard on what can and cannot be; but it's not an instant process, it takes years upon years for the truth to spread, and right now we're in passing between the gnostic belief of there being a God and the agnostic belief that the burden of proof lies on those who assert its existence.  All those who believe God is a matter of opinion are the same who insisted the shape of the world was, too, and I guarantee you the world's shape doesn't change based on belief.

That's not to say I agree that people who believe these things should be called insulting names, but it is important to acknowledge these standards and forge new beliefs based on changing circumstances; as said, to refuse to do so is dishonest.

It's not that they don't share the same opinion as me - I'm perfectly fine with people beliving in different things than I do.

It's because they ignore the reality and facts around them.  You can't believe in a god without closing down your mind to what you see.

god is real but you should always pray and not to get lost following the devil

We have a lot of belief which is great but there is a simple point of everything for which people need to work, travel, and just live to understand and even  some of the people  doesn't get It in their entire life till they die, and the people that understand It would think that those who didn't understand It did the right thing.

God is Time, Space, Energy and Matter. God is the creator of all things, He has infinite power on infinite time and space.

God is the universe /thread

If god exists, then so is the opposite, devil.


Religion of god promotes caring and sharing which resemble socialism and communism, that implies religion of devil represent capitalism and survival of fitness.


If the statement above is true, then which religion should we really worship?

Sharing !== communism.  Communism = single monopolistic governing entity AKA supreme overlords standing on top of everybody and telling them what to do.

We should share regardless of beliefs or background.  We are one race, one family, but we are constantly at distress and without peace.

I can't believe this thread is still going

Kindness is free.  ;D

Religion has nothing to do with God and is the biggest straw man for atheists and God haters.

I don't know God, but I believe in the immortality of the human conscience and I believe that conscience and self awareness exists in everything living. The trivialization of the conscience and the spirit by science makes me certain that we are in the dark ages of spiritual understanding.

True.  But he was only invented about 6000 years ago (when society became self-ware???  or not..  see i don't believe in words, just thoughts and actions. (like Rush the band).     ;D

The invention of religion is about the same time people started grouping in settlements and farming, and stopped being nomadic.

Basically, you see the same people day after day, someone figured out people are gullible and you can have power over them.

Dank wont let God die and Vod wont let Dank live ;)

I wonder whether anyone read the article in OP, as I see most of the discussions have nothing to do what is explained in the article !!!

that's what usually happens when you start a religion war or a shitstorm


how could he be discovered earlier if we couldn't communicate to each other properly or we couldn't share the idea, build monuments etc.

I am assuming that this thread is just self moderated so you can spread theist propaganda.
Posting a thread like this can and is going to be controversial...

If god does really excist, then so what? Who gives a shit? He won't help you anyway, why the fuck would you worship someone/something like that?

so you achieve eternal life without burning in hell

I've never been to church since I was a baby but, I was baptized. Never once did I even think to put any time into religion. I've never asked God for anything besides once, a couple months a go. I wrote a small note and taped it to the door of the nearest church. It was the only thing I could think of for some reason to solve our problem. My girlfriend and I were in a very shitty, depressing, dangerous, and hopeless situation that was brought upon us by one of our friends. We were happy one day, then over 5 days shit got too real. Nothing was our fault, but basically had a friend who's boyfriend was beating her outside our apartment after a meth binge they did when we didn't know they were in town. We called the cops when the dude was beating her in the streets. Then we find out that she was lyig to her family, her BF wasn't beating her, we lied to the cops. This was after helping her fix her broken car, paying for her food and gas, and housing her while she was visiting while her boyfriend was in the hospital and then in jail. We were sooo fucking depressed that somehow we were now in fear for our well being in our home. So, I left a little note at a Church and since then, we have never seen or heard from either of them. Even though we thought we were still in the middle of a shit show. So that was cool.

So, how do you come to this conclusion that God will not help?
Any evidence for it?
How God should help?
Where and how?

In order for god to help you, you must first open your mind and more so, your heart, to become receptive of the higher dimensions.

i am stupid.  i am eintsein.

By your explanation, since this life is complex way beyond what people can easily figure out, and since the universe created life, the universe is god.


True. Atheists have great faith, because they believe there is no God in the face of the evidence around them.


The proof is in the fact that you are the only YOU that there is. You are in yourself. You are not in anyone else. You are you, just like I am I.


No evidence of a big bang. Just a lot of political screaming that there was a big bang. Nobody has proof of it. The evidence can be interpreted many different ways. "Big Bang" is science fiction.

Of course, now we have Bit Bank, called Bitcoin. Focus there, because evolution is 100% fantasy, except for the fact that it is political science - if you say something long enough and loud enough, people will start to believe it sooner or later.

The definition of "god" at http://dictionary.reference.com/ suggests the Supreme Being.

:)

Yeah, I agree. This sounds shady. At first I thought you were just writing a provocative article to get people into a heated debate, but now it sounds more like you'll filter anyone with different beliefs from you.

/RANT
I bow to no man or god and I believe the Cosmos will help guide my evolution. Not everyone feels this way, but sometimes I'll jest about Christians believing in a floating man in the clouds barking orders. To me, Christianity sounds like a bunch of brainwashed people who believe that they'll burn in a pit of firey acid for all eternity if they don't bow to their Christian God who claims to be all loving and all forgiving. Christians sometimes get mean towards others, yet they have a golden rule to do unto others as you'd have them do unto you and a part of the bible says "Judge not, lest ye be judged" and another says "Who soever is without sin, cast the first stone." Yet, Christians believe that everyone is a sinner and some go around treating people like they're garbage for not believing what they do.

It all contradicts itself, yet people still believe that crap.
/RANT

Hopefully this helps get some drama started for you, as I can't see why else this thread was posted.

No masters.
Except the taxman, right?
 ::)

We ALL bow in death.

Christians are simply people who recognize that they are mistake-makers and need the help of Jesus to rise from the dead at the last day. Such recognition doesn't make them special or better in any way, even though some of them think that it does. But at least they are willing to accept the fact that they need the help of God to live and exist, and especially in the afterlife.

:)

The fact is that there is no God, no afterlife no heaven or hell.
No one you know will suffer forever because they put their faith in the wrong invisible friend,
so enjoy the time you have on earth and relax  :)

The ignorance grows strong in this one.
Never make a self moderated thread about such a topic. I'm not an atheist but God is not a reality, and that's the reality.

the new theory about the eternal universe is fascinating, you should read that, basically an endless cycle of life, this mean that when you die you return to the start of your life(the universe is consumed every 100B years, then it repeat itself, big bang again), you repeat your life again and again endless without knowing it, this might remove any senseless theory about paradise and hell

Haha! Nice. Yep, you definitely have to pay some taxes or you'll get sent to prison if you get caught. It sucks, but it's one of the things that's often quite necessary, though tax dollars don't always go only to roads, schools, and so forth.

God is all realities.

Although evidence for God is extremely great through deductive reasoning about the things we see in nature, God doesn't tell anybody to try to force the idea of God down anyone else's throat. Suggest, yes. Force, no. He hopes people will examine the evidence and come to the correct conclusion.

Since the idea that God DOESN'T exist can't be proven, and since God-nonexistence is way harder to acknowledge based on logical examination of nature around us, God-nonexistence is at best similar to a theory, and at worst a religion.

What I would like to say is, examine the FACTS. People who seem to have proven that God doesn't exist, either have a complicated, twisted explanation that is hard to follow, or they have at the base of their explanations words like "if" and "maybe" - "Maybe if it happened this way, then there couldn't have been any God."

Believers in God accept Him, usually, because of some writings in a book, or because of some personal experience. God reveals Himself, or so they believe.

So, who do we follow? those who have the revelations, or those who say "if?"

The Bible Old Testament has been around for over 2,100 years when you examine the Dead Sea scrolls. If there wasn't some kind of strength to it, it would have disappeared long ago.

Just saying.

:)

Histories about santa have been around for a long time too. Not to mention other gods.
the fact that the fairytale is old dosent make it true

Yes and without this reality we are nothing because just "God was God is and God will"

If you take the time to research the quantity and quality of info in the Old Testament, you will see that it is impossible for such a writing to have come into existence the way it has. It is way too complex. There is no other religious or "Santa" writing that even comes close to the complexity involved in making the Bible O.T. happen, and making it to be available worldwide like it is. There is more than simple, natural, random happenings going on here. And there is more than what a cult of people could do on their own.

:)

Not sure what you mean. There are loads of stories around the world about Santa and more people have seen him than God.
There is even songs written in his honour.
Not sure what you mean by complex. If you mean full of errors and contradictions you are right
I have to say that there is more proof for santa than God.

So taxes (tribute) and imprisonment (body-mastery) are your reality.
Maybe the taxman is your god?

deep bro

The way out of taxes?

This is a rather long audio, almost 4 hours. But it is full of fascinating stuff. Among the stuff, if you listen closely, you will hear the way to beat the taxman, hands down.

http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-39904/TS-822307.mp3

Loads of similar, additional listening info can be found at:

http://www.myprivateaudio.com/Karl-Lentz.html

http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=127469&cmd=tc

and in organized fashion, http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5duR4OvEHHxOSdEZhANETw


:)

EDIT: Basically, this only works in Canada, the US and the UK.

This statement is just wrong. You can't call something reality without being able to prove it.

Right! For all we know, all the laws of the universe that we have found out already, may not really be laws after all.

Consider this, What if God is not only God, but is also Super God. This means that He holds and controls everything that we call logic in this world and life. It means that He makes everything work together and just look like we have laws of nature, but it is really HIM simply making it look that way to us.

How can we ever really know if this is not so?

:)

If you start such questions, this never ends :)
You can even question your own existence.
How do you know that you really exist, that you are not just part of some matrix (like in the movie matrix).

Forum commenting is fun. So, let's keep commenting.

The only reason Super God has not appeared before is because of the word "Super." For believers in God, the term is God Almighty. Same thing.

We, people, are extremely ignorant. How do we know that we are extremely ignorant? Scientific research has been trying for, at least, decades (if not hundreds or thousands of years) to increase the lifespan of people. Yet the success is virtually nonexistent. How do we know? Because there are still groups of people here and there around the world who live longer than scientists can make anyone else live. (Of course, for all we know, there might have been a race of super-smart scientists who lived in the distant past, who increased the lifespan of everyone from, say, 10 years, to what it is today.)

So, to examine ALL avenues, let's question our own existence, until we find out one way or another if we really DO exist. It's all part of research.

:)

Nice!
Glad to see something like this.

In my experience, it is easy to interest people in liberation if you give them the simplest of instructions, like in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pF8WiyVFytQ

I only wish that such audios were accompanied with documents,
because it is really easy to screw up something so simple as a 4-line claim.

Unfortunately, most today do not have the attention span to read even a few pages.  :-X

Passive acceptance of the taxman is no way to live free.

Karl is his own kind of guy. He's a tough guy from New York. And he does what he does the way he does, both to straighten out the country, and for his own benefit. He will win BIG in the future once he gets enough of the people of these 3 countries doing what he does.

What is the best way to teach people? You need to make them think. You need to give them the answers in such a way that they have to think to understand what they have.

Doing what Karl is teaching people to do takes guts. You don't learn it by listening to Karl for only one hour. Lots of attorneys don't understand this stuff, and they have been "practicing" for years. It's for this reason that Karl doesn't like templates.

Here is a site where somebody has taken it on himself to do templates. I don't know where this person got all his info. Some is from the audios. Yes, it is a bit of a crude site. We need to make better sites with more clarification. Here it is: http://plaintiffmustappear.blogspot.com/.

Here are a few of Karl's personal docs. They suggest the idea that Karl didn't win, and he didn't in a direct way. But he will when he goes at it the next time, with people of 3 nations behind him. Behind him just through the fact that they are using what he has virtually perfected. Look at the docs to see how much he will win. The docs: https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B8BdR0w2oZY_d3F2ZjZtSk1JWWM&usp=sharing.

Start listening to the audios. This is real basic stuff, like Judge Judy, without her interference in her own court.

:)

EDIT: I haven't seen all of these docs together any other place. I have downloaded most of them, maybe all of them. You should download them, too, so that a lot of us have copies in the event that Google goes nuts and takes them down.

Note the boxes around most of the court sites in the docs. English grammatical definitions say that anything in a box, or in square brackets [like this], isn't on the page. So you can inform without actually using. Get it?

EDIT 2: What is the reason for Quantum Easing? When we have people of 3 countries winning as big as Karl will win (see the docs), governments and attorney and banking crooks will need LOTS of cash to pay off our court wins.

You can't say that Ironman is reality since there is no proof, and until you prove it isn't reality.
Isn't the same with God being reality? You can't say that.

Tell that to the cops who beat Rodney King, and many, many others for no reason. Google "police brutality" and see the millions upon millions of hits. Or thoroughly peruse this one simple site: http://www.copblock.org/.

:)

EDIT: Sorry, you didn't edit fast enough.

Thanks for the extra links! I like this basic stuff; it is right up the alley of the people in this thread.  ;D

I also wanted to mention Patrick's site since it is also relevant (for more advanced students):

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WethePeople_Shareholders/

Also, make sure you are using the right dictionary (better to use more than one)!

https://archive.org/details/cu31924022836534

I don't want to detract from your message, so thanks again for pointing us all in the right direction!!

If god is reality and man can't explain existence, then how come everything we've been able to explain so far has made sense and works with other explained laws?

Explain this:

Roberts' Seth books are all readily available for anyone to study and attempt to explain
and the Seth phenomenon and its content are in the domain of world experience -- but far
beyond explanation. I am inclined to take a cautious position approaching expansive
phenomena of this type, merely wanting to emphasize that we can and should no longer
wish them away. As with psychiatric systems, any world view may have its own limits of
relevance. Ours is now being challenged (Beahrs, 1982, p. 172).

http://www.rivier.edu/faculty/pcunningham/Research/Problem_of_Seths_Origin.pdf

God makes sense. If people would fill themselves up on the Bible, with the idea that they were going to prove it rather than disprove it, they would understand what God is really all about, why He made us, what His glory is, and when and how He is going to praise us.

:)

Yeah you got me too quickly. I edited out that nonsense when my brain kicked up a notch, sorry it was already late and I'm tired.
I've realized that 'until proven guilty you're innocent' is just written on paper, in reality it's worth nothing.

I posted this elsewhere, I don't remember where. But if you want to see a bunch of investors applaud the speech of an attorney, watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUow1DhAubA. Attorney Marc Victor is excellent, in this video, and as an attorney.

:)

I think there is very little evidence that god is "real" however there is some evidence to support this. There is also a lot of evidence to suggest that god is not the creator of the universe.

In theory god even could have created the events that scientists say "created" or "started" the universe. In reality there is no real way to know with 100% certainty if god is real or not. You must use faith to believe what you think is right and will not find out until after you die.

Let me say one basic thing about Karl's method. It is so basic that he essentially doesn't formally, officially use codes and court cases.

The codes are their codes. So, while Karl uses them to remind them that they need to abide by their codes (uses them in [] square brackets or in boxes, so he doesn't officially use them), that's all he uses them.

Karl's method is based on one person trespassing against another person's property. That's it. Karl doesn't use attorneys. He doesn't go against them either, or against corporations. Karl does it man to man, in the courts. Common law is basic law, and it explains how man is above the corporations, how the corporations can't harm or trespass against man.

Basically, only Canada (except Quebec), the U.S. (except Louisiana), the U.K., and whatever territories and protectorates they have, are under this kind of common law. It's powerful.

:)

Scientists don't really have a clue, scientifically, about what happened on earth beyond about 4,500 years ago. Why not? The cataclysm that was Noah's Flood happened about then. It wiped out archaeological events that happened prior to that time. It changed enough of the way things work on earth that even C-14 carbon dating is probably way off. The whole energy structure on earth might be different than it was back then.

Take a look at the Bosnia Pyramids: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5PlEJ0B5O4 and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64150xWWhZE and many more places. We are finding out what Atlantis was before the Great Flood destroyed it. A lot of "history" will have to be rewritten.

:)

Do you know how the orders are paid out?
I see orders for large sums but
it is hard to believe that Karl, et. al. are receiving cash (as you allude).
Any thoughts on this?

Lauda, reality is not objectuve, it is completely subjective to our perceptions.  If you perceive it, it is real.

It depends on the kind of order. Karl's big money was not payed out because the judge messed with his paperwork, and unlawfully converted it (with the help of the court clerk) into something different than what Karl had placed into the courts. In other words, they edited his paperwork, thereby taking him out of the common law side of court, and placing him into civil law.

There are a dozen ways Karl can come back on this. I don't really know what he has in mind, but I am guessing that he will come back on the judge, man to man, for harming him.

It seems that there are loads of people all over the place, who are using what Karl teaches to get various kinds of settlements. The proof that settlements like this are happening (without Karl) can be seen in Judge Judy. Or, simply look at all the court cases around the world where there is a claim filed, one person against another. Usually somebody wins, and it isn't always the one making the claim.

This is basic law stuff. The ONE MAIN DIFFERENCE is that Karl is using common law direct, the way that it should be used. It used to be this way back in the late 1700s and early 1800s. But, over time, the attorneys and judges wiggled their way into taking control, so they could make money. Karl is simply taking the attorneys out of the picture, and using the law to limit the judges to simply judging the cases based on the facts.

Probably the biggest area of success that Karl has had is, helping parents to get their kids back from CPS (Child Protective Services). The kid is whose property? Prove it! Who has a vested interest in the property (the child). Return my property to me.

Take the time. Watch the videos. Listen to the audios.

:)

Reality changes with your perception? For example, it didn't hurt last time, so no problem. But it hurts this time, so it is now bad. (A bad drug trip)

:)

Religion doesn't work that way, since you can neither prove nor disprove god.

Can you provide any information that supports you?
As fas as i can remember i saw, heard and read pretty much scientific news dating their findings more than 4,5k years...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth

This Wikipedia article says two basic things.
1. The earth IS so old...
2. We base our findings on radiometric age dating.

Then when you look up "radiometric age dating," you will find out how the dating is done. It is very interesting. It leads you to believe that "they" know what they are talking about. Yet the article is full of suppositions, "if's," that show you that the whole thing is complete guesswork. For example, "... the heavy parent isotopes were produced by nucleosynthesis in supernovas... ." Now, who in the world has ever been out to a supernova to analyze that this is what happened, and that this is how it works? It's a good story. But it is entirely guesswork. There is probably some scientist who has found out that this could not work like this, but his paper on it has been "lost" by the universities that would rather control their "stories" for their own financial benefit rather then the truth, that they don't really know. There are lots of statements like this throughout the article.

What it is, is, a science fiction story that has been built up over a long time, and does seem to have some good evidence behind it.

The most solid dating goes back to where the most ancient city ruins are the ones that are sitting on the base sub-strata, where there is nothing below them. These cities have pottery in them that can be shown by comparisons with pottery in later cities, right up to the present, that the age of the oldest cities is right around 4,500 years old.

This is a whole field of endeavor, with much competition between researchers. It is very interesting, but it is also a many-years study. It includes a form of forensics that separates the "if" people from the "fact" finders.

I read science fiction, too, once in awhile. But I don't cross the fiction with what is know as fact if I can help it.

:)

So you are directing me where it says Earth is old 4.5 billion years, there are pyramids older than yours 4.5k years, and many heritage is older than 4.5 thousand years. I don't get your point there. And if you don't understand how are supernovas and other stars studied in the long distance, parsecs would fit the best, and then you state "who in the world has ever been out to a supernova to analyze that this is what happened, and that this is how it works" I simply have no choice than let you be useful and do some research how it's made, pretty interesting stuf.

Also: Stonehenge, Gobekli Tepe

Sorry for being unclear. The point that I was trying to make is that ALL dating beyond 4,500 years ago, or so, is base on "if" one way or another. "If" isn't fact. "If" is guesswork.

:)

Indeed @nakazznicek,

Here are some examples that refute @BADecker

Tree ring records > 11,000 years
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendroclimatology

Ice core records ~ 1 Million years old:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core

Paleomagnetic records >5 Million years old:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleomagnetism

Actually, all these things are interpretations of certain kinds of evidence. Since we don't know how the evidence was "deposited" there, because we weren't there to observe it, we don't know if we are interpreting it correctly.

While the Bible leaves some of its areas open to interpretation, it is also a book of records, where people recorded what they observed.

Examine the Bible the same way you examine all science, and you will find that the Bible outdoes everything else in all areas of accuracy.

:)

You can't prove shit and scientists can prove a lot of things but not everything
Therefore agnosticism wins by default.

Dismissing something listening to others shows a very high level of stupidity

This I can't argue against, but I will say I feel more comfortable taking an educated guess by extrapolating trends instead of reading the ramblings of some old dudes about "how it all is" ::).

FFS most all crap written by humans (except hard engineering material) is just subjective drivel. Always has been, always will be.


"I saw 16 UFOs last night, they descended in a perfect circle and landed, one of them dropped a ladder, down which came a small grey alien wearing a denim suit."

There! I wrote down a claim in a record, do you trust I am telling the truth?

Any process that requires trusting information is NOT scientific (that's an axiom on which bitcoin is constructed BTW).

Also the bible has been subject to "chinese whispers" where information is corrupted as time passes. For example the 7 days of creation, the oldest known texts do not use the word "day" but "cycle". Not that it matters when the original text was just some dude writing stuff anyway.

Also, Just because something is old doesn't make it better, often it makes it crapper. But lots of people think only old texts can contain truths, like the old fashioned folk were completely trustworthy and never knew how to lie in order manipulate their game, bullshit! They probably lied more profusely because it would have been more difficult to cross reference and audit back then.

Indeed, plus we are all born agnostic.

Yes, and the bible is a record of facts only if you believe it.

Just throw off your chains and turn agnostic, then I'll stop trollin you! :D

You are talking about invisible chains, but what about the real ones?

What about the taxman?

If you do not settle matters quickly with him, your adversary may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison.

And if that happens, you surely won't be free again until you have paid the last penny.

I agree, taxation is a very real thing! Unlike god/nogod which can never be answered.

I think some tax is OK, like payment for upkeep of local systems and services.

But a big slice of the pie goes to military budget allocation... seems like the fucking dark ages!


No tax... We are all free to stop suckling on the systems man nipple and run like a deer into the deep woods... ayeeeeaaa....

Of course if you ran in with a group of "like minded" people then after a few generations it would all start up again, some fat bastard doing less work and "charming" everyone for an easy ride, same old same old. And after several more generations a small village fence might seperate one group from another etc.

The only general solution would be a globally distributed P2P borg like society where no single mind can hold a secret, all minds connected and morals/laws decided by majority voting, all nodes equal (proof of body) but that's a whole other thread i guess.

So taxes (tribute) are your reality.

Your buddy BADecker just showed you how you can avoid the taxman, live free, and think for yourself.

Sure, education takes time and effort... But

Isn't that more important than arguing over whose god deserves more tribute?

Isn't it even more important than trolling?



More food for thought on this subject:
http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?1121-Indorsed-Bill-Remedy

Maybe yours?


He was banging on about god, not taxes.


I'm agnostic, google it.


Mehhh.


My reality is my wife and three kids.


Of course fiat money is a pyramid scam, and commercial law is a bondage placed upon your commercial identity, you only just working that out?

I spent a few years living as a freeman under english common law (hardcore), you do not need to pay taxes that you do not deem fair exchange. But I think some taxes are fair exchange.

I still stand under all common law, but do fuck around with some statutes, while my children are young.

You can only be tried under commercial (statute) law with your consent.

This does not mean anything goes, au contrair, as a freeman you must be very responsible and considerate of others, much more so than living as a commercial pleb.

Plainly, taxes are your reality:


Taxation is fair exchange??

I think it is more like tribute.

What you are receiving "in exchange" is protection from a racket.

Why is that fair "sometimes"?

there is no god, there is only science and his discoveries, looks at the CCC theory, is a fabulous theory

Science is a "he"?

What about world experience?

If it is not science, it does not exist?

If you like Penrose, you should check out the ORMEs theory:
http://tesla3.com/free_websites/ormus_science.html

I agree with you, some taxes are tantamount to an extortion racket.


Some taxation I view as fair exchange, for example I am happy to contribute to the refuse collection system and maintenance of public grounds in the town I live, the firemen, police and ambulance services etc, the local council tax I pay toward that I view as fair.

'We all recognize the racket
about most of the governments
that humanity has ever payed into.
Some of us just go one racket further.'
--My bastardization of Dawkins

i like the ccc theory because i caught up with it without knowing it, then i discovered about penrose ccc

I really wonder if such a theory can explain the Problem of Seth's Origin and if so, how?

Sorry, I could not read your link. It is not readable on bright green. This is hurting my eye !!!

You can paste the text into another document on your machine or in the cloud.

Also, I strongly recommend these safety glasses for all computer users:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000USRG90/

The high-frequency machine light stresses the pineal and this is not ideal for spiritual growth.

If you don't have Amazon Prime, I can order this item for you with my Prime account (you get free shipping):
https://localbitcoins.com/ad/102557

Why u have used such big & complicated words to explain God ? Anything real & comprehensible must be explainable in simple terms...

of course, I am sure and believe
God is reality.

If you have any doubt that God is real, take a look at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395. While this post doesn't explain anything about which religion, if any, has the right idea about God, it does show how easy it is to see that God exists.

:)

That is an awesome explanation. Never came across something like this before...

The points there aren't valid however.

     Machine usage is  in progression - That argument would mean that god himself is not god, and has a creator, since his abilities would require an intelligent creator going with what you've said. Besides that, nature has evolved it so that we can be complex beings, doesn't mean we were "created".

     The nations look for god - Have you ever wondered why the majority of people hundreds to thousands of years ago believed in God(s), this is because they had limited knowledge of themselves and the world around them. As we progress and learn more, we realize that most of the things around us(Even ourselves) were not made by god, but were formed after millions of years, which naturally leads to less people having to believe in God to explain the world around them.

     The belief in deities came about from the fact that earlier humans tried to explain the world around them. Since they didn't know the scientific method back then and hardly even had an understand of things like math, they decided to do what's easiest, and simply state that a higher being created everything and everyone. As we naturally progress, we learn that most/if not all of what we believed was not made by God(s), but was actually made/formed/evolved naturally over long periods of time(Volcanos for example, the Sun, etc).

     Also, the very concept of Infinity is broken in a way. People like to deem some things as being infinite, but the problem is that you can't make the declaration that something is infinite since you haven't reached it's finite limits. How do we know that PI is infinite? We actually don't. The same goes for those that believe in a God. The words that we use to describe "God"'s talents and power don't really exist, so to speak, so the concept of "God" itself is likely an incorrect one.

The points at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395 are entirely valid, in part because scientists are proving them out every day, even though they don't often express them like this.



This idea - that God must or must not have a Creator - is not accurate because God does not necessarily have to be within the universe. Thus, He can have an entirely different set of attributes than the things of the universe, including to literally be eternal, while at the same time not being effected by eternity. The idea that God must or must not have a creator, is simply an idea, not even a theory, has no proof itself, and doesn't show or prove anything about God.

Cause and effect show that even if there is evolution, God has caused it - the Great First Cause.



Nobody knows for a fact that millions of years exist. Measurements of geology, and extrapolations of such into the distant past, could in reality have been affected by multitudes of variables for which we have no indicators. For example. Physics constants in the distant past might have acted differently. We simply do not know.

People STILL have "limited knowledge of themselves and the world around" us. We don't know for an absolute fact what will happen in the next second. The fact that our daily activities seem predictable simply shows the stability inherent in the universe. An example of the fact that we don't know even 1 second into the future is Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Many of the people of these cities did not have a clue that in the next second they would be gone, simply vaporized.

The point is that we still need God today, just like all the peoples of ancient times. In fact, we can't get away from needing God. Even the people who are comfortable in their atheism have simply switched their god to themselves, because they still don't know even 1 second into the future what will happen. They are essentially calling themselves god by flippantly suggesting that there is no God.



Because people have been devolving, people of prehistoric times didn't need our form of scientific method. They had the ability to naturally know the processes for all kinds of understandings, understandings that we, in our devolved state, have to use our step-by-step scientific method to figure out.

Evidence of the greatness of our prehistoric ancestors has examples in the construction of their architectural works. For example, if we had to produce the Great Pyramid today, it would be a world-boggling task. And one or more of the pyramids in Bosnia are much larger than the Great Pyramid.

If you look at Graham Hancock's video, ‘Magicians of the Gods’, snapshots of a work in progress - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcPgIphDWGY - you will see that we are finding out that the thing that we call Atlantis was really a gigantic, worldwide trade organization in prehistoric times. It may even have been a one-world government, further advanced than what we have become today. Their science was different, and may have been greater. We are still finding out the details.

We are devolving, not evolving.



The fact that we don't know a whole lot of attributes about God, doesn't negate the fact that He exists. The evidences that prove the existence of God found at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395, don't really have any method for determining if God is a He, or a She, or an It, or Something Else. All they do is show that God exists. And it is all based on the definitions for the words "proof," "evidence," and "God" ... and the fact that our scientists are using the scientific method to prove the whole thing out, on a regular basis, every day, just by doing what they do, even though they don't say it this way.

:)

"This idea - that God must or must not have a Creator - is not accurate because God does not necessarily have to be within the universe. Thus, He can have an entirely different set of attributes than the things of the universe, including to literally be eternal, while at the same time not being effected by eternity. The idea that God must or must not have a creator, is simply an idea, not even a theory, has no proof itself, and doesn't show or prove anything about God."

There you are giving your opinion on the matter. You can't say that God is outside the universe, because I can equally say that he is inside the universe, which further points to the fact that the titles we use to describe God are incorrect, such as infinity(Which is an "impossible" concept).

"Because people have been devolving, people of prehistoric times didn't need our form of scientific method. They had the ability to naturally know the processes for all kinds of understandings, understandings that we, in our devolved state, have to use our step-by-step scientific method to figure out.

Evidence of the greatness of our prehistoric ancestors has examples in the construction of their architectural works. For example, if we had to produce the Great Pyramid today, it would be a world-boggling task. And one or more of the pyramids in Bosnia are much larger than the Great Pyramid."

Nope, the great pyramids were constructed similar to how the great wall of china was, through the labor and work of thousands of individuals who died for their king/emperor. The bodies of those who helped construct the great wall of china have even been found outside and inside the wall. It took many years, but those tasks were accomplished and neither of them are "miraculous".

People from prehistoric times also likely didn't believe in god. If you're talking about hominids such as Homo Habilis, erectus, etc, they didn't believe in god. Man used the concept of God to try and explain the world around him. Now that we(mankind) are gaining more knowledge, we now know that using God to describe things is no longer needed. It fits perfectly with the evolution of mankind and is also a reason why God doesn't exist.


"The fact that we don't know a whole lot of attributes about God, doesn't negate the fact that He exists. The evidences that prove the existence of God found at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395, don't really have any method for determining if God is a He, or a She, or an It, or Something Else. All they do is show that God exists. And it is all based on the definitions for the words "proof," "evidence," and "God" ... and the fact that our scientists are using the scientific method to prove the whole thing out, on a regular basis, every day, just by doing what they do, even though they don't say it this way."

I know you're trying to give reasons for God's existence, but those you've given in that link are hurting your point of view/what you're trying to express. There are few-to no "true", solid reasons for the existence of god, but there are a plethora for his lack of existence.

you can't see God, because God not human.
but you can believe God is Reality. if you dont believe god is reality,  how the world was create?

My opinion is simply a response to your opinion. As stated, your opinion has no real backing because we are talking about God. The fact that God, by dictionary definition, is greater than we, without having a first-hand look at Him, we can't tell whether or not he was created. In addition, because He is greater than we, even if we DID have a first-hand look at Him, we STILL might not be able to determine if He was created or not. Thus, the whole question is moot, unless we can find some evidence.

Simply because you say that God "is inside the universe," doesn't keep me from saying that He is NOT inside the universe. You are trying to negate the thing that I am saying while allowing yourself to keep on saying the opposite thing. Not only is this NOT fair, but it doesn't even smack of reasonable science.

I am unaware that anybody uses the title of "infinity" for describing God. While infinity is a difficult concept, it is not at all an impossible concept.



When we examine the method that was used to build the Great Pyramid, we find that nobody knows for a fact how it was done. New ideas about the process are popping up every now and again. We find no record of bodies being found inside the walls of the Great Pyramid that I am aware of. There is great difference between the construction of the Great Wall and the Great Pyramid, including the time frames, and the length of time.

The fact remains, that if we with all our technology decided to build a duplicate Great Pyramid, the doing of it would be so expensive that it might be impossible for us to do it. Consider moving 30-ton stones, and larger, from Aswan all the way to Giza which is almost 600 miles by the Nile River course. Whatever their technology, be it blood, sweat and tears, or be it some form of anti-gravity, it is greater than ours... albeit different.



People from prehistoric times had way more reason to believe in God. They were closer to the time of the Beginning, when the Great First Cause started the whole thing. There wasn't as much time for the loss of ancestral memory.

Standard modern theories about "hominids such as Homo Habilis, erectus, etc," are way more fable than they are fact. When you take a handful of skeletons, and try to describe whole cultures from them, you are constructing fable, not fact. If you happen to be accurate, it is entirely by accident.

The Graham Hancock video that I talked about previously, ‘Magicians of the Gods’, snapshots of a work in progress - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcPgIphDWGY - is only one little video out of many showing that our notions of what prehistoric humankind was like are way off.

It's time that our world of archaeology and paleontology wakes up to reality rather than it's self-created dark ages that we live in now.



Actually, the fact that the existence of God fits the description of the things that science is proving with overwhelming clarity, shows that atheism is simply one of the weakest religions around. Since the evidence for atheism is weak, and the evidence for God is universal, atheists have to have very strong faith to force themselves into a religion that doesn't have much evidence at all. If it had any evidence other than a good science fiction story (that most of you can't agree on regarding details), you and the other atheists would have provided it long ago.

:)

I think that God can't be reality in the physical world because it is a spiritual being.
God can be reality in our dreams, prayers, in spiritual reality, if we are believers and connected with Him.

"God" is just a word for what we each individually believe in.  It's been proven no actual god exists outside of the mind.

shut up

That sure makes your point of view valid.   ::)

Most of what was said there is wrong, but I'll skip it in order to address the most important points. The concept of God is not possible as what we use to define him are incorrect. Infinity is logically, an impossible concept. Omnipotence is logically, an impossible concept. God is logically, an impossible concept.

I think is time for a God Coin, that can be used to donate to churches

If god created us, who created god?

Everyone is welcome to his/her own opinion. The points at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395, and those listed above, are valid, because they can be proven out. In fact, not only are they valid, but they are standard points of operation used by all scientists who are using the scientific method to do their scientific investigations. Anyone can test this out. Everything that moves in the universe moves according to the laws of machine action, machine leverage.

The concept of God is entirely possible because, unlike the animals, we have the ability to think outside of the box. If our definitions of God happen to be incorrect at times, this doesn't stop God from existing.

Some concepts, like infinity and omnipotence and pure randomness, are concepts that we have a difficult time comprehending in their entirety. But simply because we can't comprehend them clearly doesn't make them impossibilities. After all, they exist as concepts.

In fact, most things that exist involve concepts that we can't entirely understand, simply in their existing. That's why coming to conclusions about things scientifically investigated is often very difficult.

Consider the wind. We feel it. We know it is there. We even know in a general way what it is made out of. But we don't have any kind of clue about any particular molecule of wind, where it comes from, or where it is going, except in an extremely general way that we can't be sure of.

:)

Depending on what God is, we can't be sure that He didn't always exist. We just don't know. At present, the best we can do to answer this question is to believe the things that some religion says about Him.

:)

Huh? There are animals that are self aware of themselves, and therefore able to think "outside the box".

Infinity and omnipotence are not just difficult concepts, they are impossible concepts and therefore only theoretical. Such things do not really exist.

Most things that exist do involve concepts that we can mostly understand. For example, we understand the formation of  stars, the properties and substances that make up the earth's core, and many more etc. Humanity has done some incredible things, the highest temperate we ever made on earth was 3 billion if I remember correctly, much hotter than even the surface of the sun. We can split atoms, the fastest traveling vehicle, New Horizons, which is a spacecraft, goes almost 100,000 mph, yes 100,000.

We know exactly what causes the wind, what it's made of, and mostly of where it's going(Hence the entire field of meteorology. Here you go:  "Wind is caused by differences in the atmospheric pressure. When a difference in atmospheric pressure exists, air moves from the higher to the lower pressure area, resulting in winds of various speeds. On a rotating planet, air will also be deflected by the Coriolis effect, except exactly on the equator."


Reading up on the almost countless achievements of man would make you rethink your stance on the impossible concept of god. The points in that link are not helping your argument, I am not atheist, but I accept that there are very, very few to almost no things that support the notion of god, but there are almost countless arguments that can be used against god's existence. The god I believe in isn't necessarily a "God", just a higher being, as I stated before that the way we define God in popular culture today is incorrect.

The term, "thinking outside of the box," isn't always clearly defined. There are levels of self awareness. The meaning of self-aware for an animal isn't the same as it is for a human.


The fact that we even consider them concepts shows that they are not necessarily impossible... except if you want to postulate that we are impossible, as well.


The word "can" suggests ability. None of us knows exactly how limited or unlimited our ability for understanding is. For example, we might have a complete understanding of 6 dimensions. We might have a limited understanding of another 8 or more. But we don't know if our understanding will ever be complete about the 8. And until we do, we can't really be sure that we will find the rest of the dimensions that we don't have any understanding about yet.


Actually, we have ideas and theories about the formation of stars and the properties of the earth's core - and the length of the universe, the Big Bang, black holes, dark matter and energy. We don't really know. There are too many variables. Electric cosmos theory fits the things that we observe about stars better than the current standard model - http://electric-cosmos.org/indexOLD.htm.


Yes, and we will probably do other and greater things in the future. What does this have to do with God being a reality?


These things are all very general. Some day we might be able to track a molecule of the air as it moves with the wind, just like we tag and track a deer or a whale.

(chuckle) The entire field of meteorology, except in extremely general terms, is one of almost complete irregularity. To see this, all you need to do is watch how the ten-day forecast changes as much as 4 times a day depending on your location in the world.


The achievements of man are almost nil when compared with what exists. For example. Life is extremely complicated. Mankind has yet to make a machine that you can dump the raw materials into (feed it), and it will replicate itself over a period of time, say, nine months. We aren't really even thinking about such a machine that can go out and gather its own raw materials for "food."

The earth is full of all kinds of these machines. The fossil record shows that in the past there were as many as 3 times the number of these kinds of machines. We aren't really even close to making just one. Even the few robots that we have made that seem to be able to replicate a little, stand as nothing in the presence of the mighty replicating machines of nature.



Machines have makers. The machines of nature have a Maker. The points at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395 include the whole operation of our basic scientific investigation. God is reality... way more than mankind. And, I want to thank you, personally, for giving me the this incentive and prompting to show these things to our readers.

:)

Why do you continue to stress inaccurate points? I already told you that what you've said in that link is incorrect.

 "Machines" do not have to have makers. Evolution thoroughly explains that.

The word does not suggest the ability, as we know the ability. The ability of god is to be all knowing, all seeing, all powerful, and infinite. The very abilities of god itself are incorrect, and cannot exist in conjunction with one another. This rules out the possibility of god being an "ultimate" being.

Meterology is a hard to field to work in when prediting the weather because of the potential for randomness or sudden changes in the weather based upon a wide variety of variables. We know exactly what composes the wind and the general direction it goes in.

All the greatest achievements of mankind have come forth within the last few hundred years and were just at the beginning, imagine the world thousands of years from now. We'll be beyond human. What you deem unknowable today will be known tomorrow. Don't try and explain things through the use of God, especially since it is an impossible concept, and especially because it will eventually get explained.

Why do you continue to assert that your opinions are the only accurate ones, and that mine aren't?



The fact of cause and effect action in everything shows that even evolution must have a cause.



The thing that you are suggesting is that man is the ultimate. This is not necessarily true. Even the process of evolution leaves open that another species could have developed somewhere in the distant reaches of interstellar space, somewhere that had much more favorable conditions for development of life, so that the life that developed there was so extremely more advanced than we are that it would seem like God to us.



But we don't know what the composition of any particular chunk of wind is at any time. Why not? Because it changes all the time, and it is way, way, way, way, way, too complicated for us to measure an particular chunk with any methods we have right now. What does this have to do with God being a reality?



We don't know this for a fact. Present archaeological findings are showing us that in the distant past there was a gigantic, worldwide trade organization, that might have even been a one-world government. Watch the video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcPgIphDWGY. Nobody knows whether or not the cataclysms that hit the ancient world won't hit us again.



Beyond human is exactly what God is now! You think that we are going to be God, and yet you won't acknowledge that God can exist? You apparently need to rethink a lot of things, especially your idea that God doesn't exist but that man can become such.

I think I'll go make a pot of coffee. You really should do the same.

:)

Because my opinions aren't opinions. You can't argue against what I say, because it is certain. A good way to test yourself how infinity is an impossible concept, is to try and think about a number that is large enough to be infinite. Use a supercomputer, use a quantum computer, it won't matter. The reason why infinity is impossible is because it is unknowable, and thus we can't say anything is infinite because it may actually be finite, but we just haven't reached it's finite point.

Using cause and effect as an argument for God is about the worst thing you can say, because then that would mean that God would have had to had a creator, and that also shows why the concept of god is impossible.

Please read what you first told me,  You said that we don't know what composes the wind, where it's going, of which I corrected you and said we do know what composes the wind and the general direction it's going...

That youtube video is so hilariously false I might use it to troll my friend one day. Seriously, please don't get your information from blatantly incorrect amateur made videos on youtube made by authors of books trying to sell their products.(His work isn't correct, it's just opinionated information for a novel he's selling, that's how they make money).

As I've said quite a number of times, the concepts by which we define god and it's abilities, are impossible concepts and that means the God we think of, all knowing/seeing/powerful is impossible to even exist. God cannot initially be infinite and omnipotent, yet retain those two qualities. They are incorrect words in the England language, logical fallacies.

When I said, "beyond human", I meant we would be beyond the biological restrictions that are apparent in all living things as of right now. I never alluded to becoming "Gods"(It's impossible for the traditional monotheistic God to even exist as I previously said). I also said Im not atheist, but my definition of God is by far the "realest" one, unlike what mainstream society incorrectly believes in. My definition would not include incorrect things such as infinity, omni/potent/scient/present that when comprised together are attributes of god. Only Omniscience and Omnipresent are the things that could constitute a "God", since they are not logical fallacies, and that means "God" isn't really a "God" in the incorrect traditional sense, but simply a higher being.

By the exact same analyses that you are using, the fact that we don't know everything, and the fact that in many areas we know very little, it's absurd to suggest that there is absolutely no possibility that God exists. Then, when you add the things at my link https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395, it is easy to see that there is a possibility that God exists. When you do detailed studies on the info at the link, you find that they prove that God really DOES exist.

The idea that God is impossible is similar to suggesting that life is impossible. Why? The only reason we we know life is possible is because it exists. We can't make it. We don't have any theory about how we could make it. Because we are so extremely limited in knowledge and ability, there's is no way we can honestly state that God cannot possibly exist. By simple thinking, we just don't know. By thinking about the info in my link, we at least can see that God does exist, whatever He may be.

:)

You're hurting your view by spewing out inaccuracies. As I said before, the possibility of a "ultimate" supreme omni/present/scient/potent being existing is impossible, because those characteristics that we use to define such a being are logical fallacies and do not actually exist. Thus, the traditional monotheistic god does not exist.

Comparing God to the evolution/initial appearance of life is extremely illogical. We know the conditions that led to life emerging, so your entire argument there is incorrect. Life is a finite source, something that is logical and feasible. Today's popular culture version of God is that of an infinite being, which is incorrect and illogical. Also, there are a plethora of theories about the start of the existence of life billions of years ago. You should read about it.

The "info" in your link are actually evidences against the existence of god, so you're only hurting your own view. You comparing life to machinery and how someone must have had to "make" intelligent life(Which is completely absurd and illogical), but that must mean that someone/something must have had to make God. You saying that everything has a cause and effect would also mean that the appearance of god must have a cause and effect, meaning god would have to have had a creator.

As I said earlier, there are little to no evidence to back up the notion that god exists, but a plethora to back up the notion that he does not.

God cannot possibly exist.

How many threads do you brainwashed idiots need?

Since the evidences shown at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395 that prove that God exists, can be examined and worked through, and are being done so on a regular daily basis by scientists around the world, these evidences and this proof overcomes your simple statements to the opposite.

:)

When you debate with God, attempting to deny His existence, you will only prove to push yourself out of existence. But, because God does exist, it will be He Who determines the method by which you will be pushing yourself out of existence. Hell won't be fun for you.

:)

I already told you that those "evidences" are working against you, they are reasons as to why the traditional monothesitic god does not exist. You can choose to believe otherwise, but you're simply wrong...

The very concepts of Hell and Heaven originated from Polytheistic(Belief in more than one god) religions. It also goes to show just how much religions copy one another in their beliefs. If you deem those polytheistic religions as false, then you deem the utmost beliefs in your own religion false, such as the concepts of heaven and hell(Which are indeed false, but I'm just showing you how all religions, no matter how silly, are equal in substance, or rather, lack of substance).

Generally speaking, the reasons why you haven't heard it expressed this way before, is because few people express it like this. Why don't they? Because...

Most people don't get down to the nitty gritty of thinking this deeply or simply.

Religious leaders often aren't logical thinkers, except in the ways that they have been trained... their religion. Often they speak the words of their religious books, because it is those words that bring people to their religion.

Scientists don't often speak this way, because their goal isn't the overview regarding God. Their goal has to do with proving out some aspect of scientific investigation that they are looking at. In addition, because the politics of universities and companies that use scientists, prohibit scientists from even going in this direction, they value their job above expressing things that are against policy.

Years ago, thinking like what is at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395 was more or less automatic among the people. When you are riding a bicycle, you don't often concentrate on the automatic process of pedalling. But you could. In similar way, people simply live without realizing that the things about the proof for God are apparent, automatically perceived, without thinking about it. Then when some well-thought-out logic against God comes along, they don't have an answer. So they are swayed towards the idea that God doesn't exist.

:)

Thank you for your concern and well-meaning advisals. While it is true that I am wrong about some things sometimes, I am not wrong today, not yet, and especially not about the things at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395.

Whether or not certain details about the various religions are true or not, the info at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395 proves that God exists. The only reason it might not for someone is, the particular someone hasn't examined and carried forward the evidences, or at least examined how others have carried out the evidences.

:)

I've told you that everything in your link, from the youtube videos to your opinions to the theories presented(cause/effect) are reasons as to why god does not exist. None of those things are arguments for god's existence, they are arguments atheists would use to disprove god's existence(and rightfully so). You're trying to use them for that purpose, but it's having the opposite effect.

Also, why do you keep repeating the same lines over and over again? Is this a form of trolling? It's not helping your point of view since it's proof against God's existence, so I'm curious.

You must be military or ex-military. The military tells you to tell people what you are going to tell them, then to tell them, and then to tell them what you have told them. The reasons found at the link are good enough for me and many others. If you and others don't want to accept them, that's your choice.

Since you are suggesting that repeating stuff is trolling, are you trolling, at least in your opinion?

:)

I already told you, the "evidences" in your link are evidence for why god does not exist. Why do you continue to try and prop up your argument with evidence that your opponent would use against you?

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah...

Just a keep on a tellin' it, buddy. Continue to
:)

look at you no lifes posting these gigantic posts  ::)

Hi, there. Generally speaking, over at the right edge of the browser, there is a scrollbar. You can use this to get to the bottom of the page if you want. If your scrollbar is missing, you need to update your browser.

:)

Everyone should keep this link shortcutted: http://sebpearce.com/bullshit/


:P

Ist.

The Bible says that the stars were created on the 4th day, while the man was made on the 6th day. This shows that mankind was made last of all. Because of this, people cannot be the beginnings of the galaxies.

:)

Hi Joshuar,

Kindly read Herbert Spencer; I am sure you will find his discussion of infinity and impossibility enlightening. It turns out that all explanations of creation are literally unthinkable; at least, that is what I got from reading Spencer.


My other conversation with Joshuar is here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10864565#msg10864565

God is real. He is the heavenly father of everyone. We believed on him.

science is reality.
god is exist, but i guess not even him can manipulate the situation, we do.

People don't manipulate anything except that they are programmed to do it. Freedom among people is only the illusion of freedom, be it group freedom, or individual freedom. Nobody has freedom to think or do anything. It is all programmed into him by cause and effect.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg11864476#msg11864476

:)

http://www.everystudent.com/wires/Godreal.html

Yes. God is reality; we are the fiction.

For example, we are working hard on producing A.I. computers. God did it in the form of all the human beings He created, and way better than we can even imagine (at this stage in our understanding).

:)

YES. He's real.

Yes. of course
i sure God is Reality

Seeing how unfair the world is (ex. some children die of hunger or hunger related diseases and others have diseases caused by eating too much), if God exists, he must be one of two kind of persons (this is an old argument, read Dostoyevsky, The Karamazov Brothers; or Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus):

a) he is a cruel being: because if he is all powerful and omniscient, when he created the world, he had to know how horrible it would be; moreover, he could save those innocent kids (please, don't tell me about the original sin: kids guilty for the sins of their parents?, is that divine justice?) with a snap of his finger.

b) he is a pathetic being, that can't do anything to change anything and sees with horror his creation.

But a more convincing explanation is that he is just another human creation, that helps believers give meaning to their life and dream about living forever. Just an imaginary friend that helps some of us dealing with our inevitable death.

Of course, if our brain gets a severe trauma we might end up living the rest of our life as mental retarders and our "immortal soul" won't help a thing. If we get an intermittent mental disease, our "immortal soul" won't remember a thing about the disease moments. The "soul" won't be a conscience trapped in an unconscious body. If we pass out, our "soul" goes out too. But some people think that if our brain dies, our "soul" will live forever.

A god is only reality if you believe though.

A god is only reality if you believe though.

Everything is God.
You, rock, grass, Your enemy...
We all are made from frequencies, therefore We all are one.

God is our Bestfriend.
He is always here for us.
Through the ups and down.

Well God exists everywhere.And everyone can feel the god if you sit quiet for a few minutes.

I think god is karma .Whatever you do will come back to you in the form of good/bad/punishments/shootings/killings.The myth "Shooters get Shot"! Its true because reality is wrong karma is actually reality .If God was reality then Atheist would live in their dream world which is not fancy .

God is reality, but details about Him are difficult to determine. Why? Because He is so great that we simply don't understand much of what He is about.

:)

Yes God is real and is full of love  :)

It's a pity no one points out some evidence or at least convincing arguments of that reality of god, beside saying he is real, that he made everything, etc.

I guess you talk to him, but does he answer back? Have you seen him? Even Saul/Paul of Tarsus only converted when Jesus appeared to him. Why should we be different and believe just because other people say he is real?

Love is God and God is love.

God must be an Alien.

God is every where.

The universe is like a terrarium in God's world.   :)

God exists! It is necessary in this holy faith !

god exist but calm down he's none of you

God can't be real.. based on info we have.
God = Love right ?
Well there is no such thing.. we have proven mathematically that love is a delusion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_R._Price


He proved with math that love does not exist !
Basically his formula states that any act of love is nothing but an act of altruism.
By that i mean every action ever taken by any person in all of history was done for some ulterior motive.
..usually selfish.
For example.
A mother looks after her child because it's in her best interest to procreate and keep the kid alive etc.
Is there some other kind of "bond" with the child ? maybe.. but that is not love probably just biochemistry.

I see with math we broke wide open the concept of love.
So if that is the case then all of the teachings of what ever god you worship is most likely complete bs.

There is also thousands of Religions around the world all contradicting each other.. soo ..uhhh ?

There is a quite large probability that what you said is true

Agreed. God is there.

God is a feeling a feeling of love and empathy.

I do not see the world in places where you need it...

Colin Patterson, director of the British Museum of Natural History, stated: “No one has ever produced a species by mechanisms of natural selection. No one has gotten near it.”

Actually, for math to prove that love does not exist, you would first need to overcome these three gaps in your reasoning:
The first fallacy is that life can spontaneously animate from organic material.
The second fallacy is the gap that separates plant and animal life.
The third gap in knowledge is that between any species of animal or plant and any other species.

These three fallacies that Dawson complained about in 1873 remain as "knowledge gaps" today. Scientists know these limitations of evolutionary theory are true and will be enduring, but shamefully few have the nerve to address them openly.

Indeed, evolutionists have been making the creationist mistake of allowing their theoretical framework to ossify into dogma and Darwin’s venerable theory is now slowly, methodically being exposed as the charade it was from its inception.
Read more: http://www.lloydpye.com/essay_interventiontheory.htm

@1aguar
I don't see the link to what your talking about.. to what i said about G. Price's research.

It can be boiled down to a simple insight..
No matter what scenario you propose all of them have one thing in common.
That is each one can be explained by altruism.
Every action can have 1 or more motivations.. BUT all of them share that same excuse
The common denominator.. selfish reasoning.

I can give a homeless guy $20 on the street but i could have a variety of reasons why.
And many could be motivated because of subconscious reasons too.

So sorry i don't get how what i said and what you said are related.
Maybe your right i have no clue.. you went over my head in left field on me LOL

It was an interesting reply though so thanks for posting ;)

The fundamental theorem of natural selection (as explained by that Price Equation) has little to do with human behavior. Darwin’s gradual evolution was and is a myth that became a religion. You would have to be some kind of a religious believer (Darwinist?) if you think that math proves that love does not exist.

There are times in war and other places, where a person gives up his life for his buddies, out of love. Not all of this can be for selfish reasons, every last time. There is often spur-of-the-moment, instantaneous action involved, to protect friends. Not all of that is selfishness. Some of it is love.

:)

I can understand the perspective of an informed and intelligent believer. One that adapts his believes to the knowledge that science gives us about the universe and the world.

But I can't understand someone that believes in something he really knows nothing about (knows only what other people tell him, people that also know nothing about it), like life after death and God, based on believes that go against realities proved by science beyond any reasonable doubt, like evolution. We have millions of fossils, we have genetic studies supporting it, we have a theory that makes sense taking in account all this evidence... they have a book written in the bronze age... like many others, that say the opposite.

An intelligent believer could point out that we know little about what happened before the Big Bang, why the laws of science have their precise values or the exact way that converted simple matter into life. He could say, you see, it was God. But rejecting evolution, saying things like God created the universe in 6 days (rested on the seventh... he needed to rest?), he just destroys all credibility about what he is saying. Any people saying that a scientific conclusion is wrong has an heavy burden of evidence to fulfill.

Well, as Sam Harris said, if on a first date you say that you believe Elvis is still alive, instantly you'll pay the price: say good bye to your chances with the girl. If you say something that is similar, like saying you don't believe in evolution, you might still be lucky, but only if the girl is dumb.

The conclusions of the Modern Synthesis (Neo-Darwinism) are dogmas; they have not actually fulfilled their burden of evidence, as I have mentioned to Spoetnik.
Darwin’s gradual evolution was and is a myth that became a religion. It was actually proven that this is a myth by Dawson in 1873 and his conclusions remain valid today. Scientists know these limitations of evolutionary theory are true and will be enduring, but shamefully few have the nerve to address them openly.
Read more: http://www.lloydpye.com/essay_interventiontheory.htm

Life is a series of endless possibilities...  ;)

Anyone arriving on some conclusions that go against current scientific knowledge based on someone that wrote in 1873, when no fossils had been identified correctly and there was no genetic science, has some serious updating to do on biology and the science of evolution.

Scientific knowledge is like reality, if you ignore it, bad things can happen: for instance, the house someone built might fall, because it wasn't constructed right, etc.

But this is a free world. Everyone has the right to believe in what he wants, even on peril of losing the girl on the first date (don't tell her you don't believe in evolution), beside some other short comings in general.

Not true, these three conclusions do not need to be updated because the evidence remains the same as it always was. Is there any concrete evidence refuting even one of these three conclusions? Last I checked, there was not.

I will be happy to evaluate any evidence you may present; this is not about free will, it is about the strength of the evidence that fills in the three knowledge gaps identified by Dawson. Why don't you present that evidence in a way that plainly clarifies the knowledge gap?

By the way, "rational" means that you can intelligently engage with new ideas when presented.

        I'm going to write further on this issue only because I'm in the mood and you don't look like the usual religious fanatic. Maybe some other people with similar ideas will also change his mind.
        But if your religion consider your duty to "spread the word of the lord", and convert the atheists, you risk burn in hell for how bad you are at spreading his word, by defending non sense things. I know in America there are some fundamentalists that still believe everything in the bible is truth. But if you said in Europe that there was no evolution, you can rest assure the conversation will end and people will look to you with a strange look. It's like saying that the earth is standing and it's the Sun that moves around us, like the church forced Galileo to state. Even the catholic church now accepts evolution (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution).

         1) Specialists don't know the exact way how matter was converted in life, but we are getting to it. We already know how to make some organic matter close to life. You can rest assure, they will find how to convert matter into life. And, yes, life was created from simple matter, not spontaneously, but with the right environment. They already know that natural electricity played a role. Ignorance on how that was made is no excuse to say it was God. In the past, people said it was God that made thunders.
         Anyway, the fact we don't now how life was created has nothing to do with evolution. Could be God making the first bacteria and then leaving evolution do the rest.

          2) I guess you took this statement from the 1873 book or from some ignorant fanatic. Both plants and animals are made of cells based on DNA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_genetics). If everything started with cells, is it hard to believe that some cells evolved into plants and others into animals? There is no doubt whatsoever that animals and plants share a common ancestor (http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/02/17/plant-and-animal-development-c/).

           3) This last one makes even less sense. We share between 94% and 96% of our genes with chimpanzees (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimpanzee#Evolutionary_relationship). It seems, God created not only men, but also chimps at his image. Saying we don't have a common ancestor is against this genetic evidence and all the fossils that show intermediate species between us.

           The statement that natural evolution didn't create any species is so absurd. Don't quote things like this, it ruins your reputation. Even us, human, have created new species. We recently have crossed genes from animals to plants, we created the dog from the wolf during a few thousand years, the modern cow from wild ones, etc; and by crossing dog species we created more than a hundred different races of dogs, by artificial selection. Do you think we can do better than nature?

          Currently, we don't real need the "god explanation" for nothing since the Big Bang. You can say it was God that made the big bang in order to make humans, but that makes little sense. God had to wait several thousand million years just for the creation of the first planets from matter created with the explosion of the first generation of stars, about 9 thousand million years to the creation of Earth and then more 4000 millions to the formation of complex animals and finally humans. That is absurd. God is very patience, but why wait for so long?
          And since modern humans exist since about 200,000 years ago, why send Abraham only 4000 years ago and Jesus 2000 years ago? God waited so long for humans and then left them without guidance for 196,000 years...
          For further absurdities, read https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=635960.msg12126292#msg12126292. I have other posts, but have no patience to go look for them.

Yes! i believe God is a reality. Whole of the system that is working flawlessly in this universe is quite an enough evidence for getting an assurance that there is someone controlling everything.

Let me tell you how we should see God as reality...

Most of the people in the world(like 90%) believe in God, the other 5% are don't sure and the rest 5% are atheist. But, did the believers really believe in Him, or what are the others 10% who are not sure or maybe didn't believe?

I was grown up in a orthodox family and I never think to check in what I am really believe or did I really believe until last year... During my 1 year research I realize that I am believer, but the way I believe and how should I really believe was so wrong. After I research the Yoga and The Bible, I open the door of the spiritual world and all I can say you people... Boys and girls, don't believe what the media or the people who are leading the temples tell you how you should believe, instead, go research the Yoga and the Bible and you will see that everything they told you was sow wrong.

It's too bad you did not truly engage with the article; now I will have to quote from it in reply to you. Fortunately, this makes my task easier, but I would prefer an engaging conversation.
Read the source: http://www.lloydpye.com/essay_interventiontheory.htm

Actually, I see that you have just contradicted yourself. If you don't use "God" to explain the common ancestor, then what explanation is left? After a century of heavily subsidized efforts to create even the most basic rudiments of life in a laboratory, scientists are still batting zero. As Dawson noted, “here also we are required to admit as a general principle what is contrary to experience.”

Funny. You think you know what God is thinking? I would say that God is indifferent to your human opinion and is not concerned with your intellectual imagination. By the way, God's Law is written on your heart, so you are never without guidance. Please do not bring the Bible into this; I don't believe in authority other than self.

2) Plant and Animal life forms are necessarily the converse of each other, the one deoxidizes and accumulates, the other oxidizes and expends. If life evolved as Darwinists claim, it would have to bridge the gaping chasm between plant and animal life at least once, and more likely countless times. Lacking one undeniable example of this bridging, science again bats zero. The animal never in its simplest forms assumes the functions of the plant.

3) “It is this gap [between any species of animal or plant and any other species], and this only, which Darwin undertook to fill up by his great work on the origin of species; but, notwithstanding the immense amount of material thus expended, it yawns as wide as ever, since it must be admitted that no case has been ascertained in which individuals of one species have transgressed the limits between it and other species.” Here, too, despite a ceaseless din of scientific protests to the contrary, there remains not a single unquestioned example of one species evolving even partially into another distinct and separate species.

Thomas H. Morgan, who won a Nobel Prize for work on heredity, wrote: “Within the period of human history, we do not know of a single instance of the transformation of one species into another if we apply the most rigid and extreme tests used to distinguish wild species.”

And this statement by Morgan is by no means an exceptional disclosure.

If researchers could prove that clinically dead patients, with no electrical activity in their cortex, can be aware of events around them and form memories, this would suggest that the brain does not generate consciousness.

In the AWARE study, consciousness and awareness appeared to occur during a three-minute period when there was no heartbeat. This is paradoxical, since the brain typically ceases functioning within 20-30 seconds of the heart stopping and doesn’t resume again until the heart has been restarted.

Read more:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1237843.msg12899128#msg12899128

For someone who denies something that is backed with so much evidence, on first impression, you seem open minded. But that has to be a pure superficial attitude. In the end, it's all about authority of the Bible. You wouldn't risk your reputation by defending what you are defending if you had not a religious agenda. You are afraid that recognizing the Bible is wrong will put in question all the rest it states.

1) There is no contradiction. I dismissed the argument that because we still ignore the exact way how life was created we have to accept that it was God. We are very close to it. I can accept the argument on the Big Bang and specially on the creation of the multiverse where the Big Bang was formed. We still have no clue on the beginning of all. But your "it was God" also says nothing about what created God.

But as I wrote, the creation of life has nothing to do with evolution. Is no argument against it. God could be the creator of the first life and left then things to evolution. Insisting on it make you an illogical person and there is no use to keep arguing with you if this is truth.

[It isn't important to the issue of evolution your point on understanding God. But I still say it's absurd to wait 13800 million of years for something believers say God could created in 6 days. The universe wasn't created in 6 days, the Bible is wrong. But God is too important to you, for you to give up him. I only expect you to accept evolution, because denying make you look ridiculous and affects your credibility defending God].

2) The differences between plants and animals are not that big. They are both based on the same system of DNA. We know they have common ancestors, the first cells.

3) Human history? Do you want a complete change of a species in 5000 years to accept evolution? That is absurd. Anyway, the dog is different enough from the wolf to serve as an example. Technically, they are still the same species, since they can still interbreed. But dogs have several genetic differences from wolfs. Evolution made that. The principle is backed during human history from dogs: species evolve, they were not created as they are. Once you accept this principle, the rest of your arguments are irrelevant.

You can't ignore all the evidence that says chimps and humans have a common ancestor. We have evidence from fossils and genes. Modern humans have genes from neanderthals and denisovans (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/12/131204-human-fossil-dna-spain-denisovan-cave/). You can't deny that they existed and were very different from us. Moreover, genetic evidence and fossils confirm that they evolved during about 2 million years since the Homo Erectus. They interbred with us and made us different. We don't have gene evidence about older ascendents, like the Homo Habilis, but we have many fossils that confirm we are related, because show a slow change toward us. Anyway, genes show we have a common ancestor with apes and that is enough to confirm evolution.

If you don't accept this evidence that we have a common ancestor with apes, I have nothing more to write about this with you, because you couldn't be arguing in good faith.

But if you accept this, this destroy any argument against evolution. The rest are details. If one accepts that we evolve from something that was similar to a ape, of course, accepting that vegetables and animals have a common ancestor is almost trivial.

I end here my participation about evolution, because if I couldn't convince you, clearly, I won't be able to do it, because you really don't want to accept the evidence and will deny what is evident for anyone with even a not very open mind but in good faith. At least you have to recognize there are strong evidence in favor of evolution and your position is to say the least very risky to your reputation.


But I have nothing against you, you look like a fine person. You are just in a denying state on this issue.

On the issue of the "soul", taking in account the recent research on the brain is absurd to say that the human brain, that is the most complex system we know on nature, doesn't create the conscience. The evidence we have point clearly in the positive sense (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness#Neural_correlates). If that wasn't the case, we couldn't explain why your "soul" is affected by a trauma to the brain. Why when we pass out, our "soul" passes out too. Why someone "retarded" or with mental problems can in certain cases became better by a surgical intervention in the brain or medication that changes the chemical balance in the brain.


Actually, the idea that there is a soul that survives the body is recent. Ancient Hebrews didn't believe in afterlife. And the first Hebrews that defended it argued this occur under the form of the Resurrection of the dead in flesh and blood and not of any "soul". Even today, the confusion on all the Christian churches about what happen when we die is immense. Some say that our soul survives; others say it's our body that is resurrected in the judgement day, same mix both versions in an absurd way ((https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_eschatology#Resurrection_of_the_dead). They don't know nothing about it and their inventions, like all invented narratives, changed with time.  

Anyway, you are saying if we could test that conscience endures the dead of the brain we would have evidence of the survival of the soul. I can accept that. I would become a believer if the existence of the soul was the only explanation. But no tests suggest that. The neurons don't just die in seconds after the heart stops, they can survive for some minutes more, therefore their survival can explain those experiences you mentioned in the post you quoted. You are wrong when you wrote "The problem is that you need a functioning brain to have an hallucination. Blood flow, electrical activity". You can have neural activity without oxygen or blood flow for some minutes while the neurons die. Until they are dead, they keep on working. Maybe they will work badly, but since they are still alive, why couldn't they create memories?

Therefore, how dare you believe that your "soul" will survive the death of your brain based on what we know? Is mixing your aspirations and your fear from death (read my https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1221052.msg12953274#msg12953274) with reality. Any prudent person would say, I don't know, I'm not shore... but believers just say, I know I have an immortal soul...
Yeah, shore. All evidence points to this: we were nothing for an eternity and we will be nothing again forever and ever. Between these two eternities of nothingness you have a life to live, in just a blink of an eye in cosmic terms. Enjoy it, respecting others. Don't bind yourself to religious rules invented by others arbitrarily during the bronze age that have no ethical ground.

I will keep it brief, maybe just one point at a time...

I accept that there are shared genes, but there is no single documented instance of the transformation of one species into another, as stated by Thomas Hunt Morgan and others. Therefore, the evidence of common genes is not sufficient to conclude that all life has a common ancestor, since the evidence does not even allow for the shared ancestry between any two species. This conclusion has simply not been validated "in the field", and it is not warranted given the lack of an example; despite their best efforts, scientists are NOT close to simulating abiogenesis, despite what you may believe, and since there has not been a single example of species transformation in human history, science bats zero on this point.


Since the conclusion of common descent promoted by neo-Darwinism has not been validated with an example of the transformation of one species into another, I can only say that you would like us to think that any argument against neo-Darwinism is destroyed and "the rest are details" because then your conclusion cannot be falsified with inconvenient details such as missing evidence (i.e. knowledge gaps) and the like. There is an alternative. What about the arguments of Pye; what about his Intervention Theory? What about the details that simply don't add up, like with domesticated plants, as detailed in the Pye article linked below:

I don't think it is rational to conclude that we evolved from apes since there is not an unquestioned example of the transformation of one species into another (any species). There is only shared genes, but that could point to something else; see Pye's essay previously and this other essay from Pye:
http://www.whale.to/b/pye1.html

I disagree with both neo-Darwinism and creationism; I know that the Bible is tampered.
I think it is important to recognize that despite a ceaseless din of scientific protests to the contrary, there remains not a single unquestioned example of one species evolving even partially into another distinct and separate species. In science, it is perfectly reasonable to expect that an example be presented before accepting the conclusion. I am not expecting you to provide such an example, because it does not exist, so if you end your participation here then you end it having not provided the sort of evidence that I am seeking (in good faith, of course). I don't think it's fair that I have to restate the arguments of Pye for your digestion when you can read his articles and see the evidence for yourself; perhaps then you will see that I am not actually denying anything. Why not have a look at the Evidence for Creation by Outside Intervention? Please have an open mind and read these two articles thoroughly before replying to me; I appreciate it!

Great, so I suggest you read about these tests that have been conducted, starting with the AWARE study.

I am sure we will get to the evidence if we continue discussing, I have already pointed out the above test; before it was conducted, researchers French and Van Lommel concluded that
"If researchers could prove that clinically dead patients, with no electrical activity in their cortex, can be aware of events around them and form memories, this would suggest that the brain does not generate consciousness."
How can you say that these researchers are mistaken if there are no researchers who dispute their conclusion? Just like with evolution, I have to ask "WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?"
That the neurons survive is not indicative of anything. You need a functioning brain with blood flow and electrical firing to have hallucinations and perceptions. None of that is present during brain death. So how are the perceptions explained?

Not true, the neurons do not work (fire) when there is brain death. There is no sense of pain, no gag reflex, etc. Why in the world would there be perception and hallucination without even basic functions like those? It goes against everything that is understood about the brain.
Show me the evidence! Find even one neuroscientist who says that a dead brain can plausibly hallucinate.

I am not afraid of death or taxes, my friend; they are both illusory.

Neo-Darwinists say that there is species transformation without any examples. Skeptics say that there is brain activity (during brain death) that can generate perception without any examples. Why don't you guys say "I don't know"?

I am not religious; thanks for offering your opinions, but I was looking for evidence...

Since you arbitrarily exclude or ignore scientific evidence, asking only for documented evidence on evolution (but indeed there is at least one case, I have to change what I wrote: dogs are indeed a different species from wolfs, they can interbreed, but their offspring are sterile), that show there are not only shared genes, but genetic evolution, since we have genetic samples from about 400,000 years ago from homo antecessor in Atapuerca, Spain, then lot of samples from Homo neanderthalensis and a few from homo denisovanian, all pointing to relations of ascendency and evolution between them (and then admixture with us), confirmed also on fossils, I'm confirming the end of my participation on this issue on evolution.

I might answer you on the soul issue later, but I have no hopes. If you reject clear cases like this one, there is little point in debating more subjective issues. I will always call religious someone who believe in god and the soul.

There is 1,000's of them listed at Wikipedia.

So which god is the real one ?

Scientifically proof that God exists and there are many examples some are. A person is born he will definitely die one day and nothing can stop him from dying when his times come the other examples are the sun, moon, stars, oceans, mountains, lava's and others they are not made by humans.

Yes God is Real. We need to believe it that He will be coming soon.

yeah he is real

If Wikipedia had a bathtub full of several thousand marbles, but only one of them was a steel ball bearing, how would you tell which one was the real steel ball bearing? If they all were colored shiny steel color, that would make it more difficult, wouldn't it?

It is stupid to ask which one is the real God. You aren't going to believe what anyone tells you. But what is more stupid is to think that none of them is the real God... that the real God isn't talked about in Wikipedia.

8)

People always need something to blame  ::)
God is reality for those people.

I believe in God. So for me it is reality

God is there, and omniscient
imagine who is the creator of our life?
and how can the universe and all its contents be organized and organized?
I am sure it belongs to God

Ofc it's real, so everything, this universe came from nowhere? Just suddenly made from nothing?! C'mon!

God may not be present but i think we should keep believing in God; it is right to be in fear to the supreme power the man had over them; it would give us ment

I believe  that god is a reality

God is real. God create us. God loves us.

God may or may not be presnt but he doesnt shows up when people need him the most; thats the saddest part of this controversy.

God is not a person; God is a mythic personification of reality. If we miss this we miss everything. Birth, life, death, the cycles and rhythms of Nature

Indeed, we are inside an engineered structure.

This is nothing spectacular. Bible believers and many others have known this for thousands of years. Look at the first chapter in the Bible. The only people who haven't know it are the evolutionists and big bang believers.

8)

Haha this is the first thing I noticed as well.

Anyway an idea is that god is not an entity, but rather a 'spirit' that embodies all of reality. The theory is that we are all the same, and that we are all 'god', but that we have been separated into the separate prisons of our mind. We are all basically talking to ourselves to cure the boredom of living forever and alone.

It's just a theory, but an interesting one.

God is real...

I think every myth is not just myth; Just look at jesus; the god of christians. Jesus really existed according to history

There is historical proof that Jesus existed, but where is the proof that he was a God? People also say that the bible is the word of God, because it exists. Therefore there is proof that the bible exists, but where is the proof that it was written by God?

Бoг peaлeн для тex ктo peaльнo в нeгo вepит.

NO; i never believe in something that i havent seen with my own eyes. I never felt the presensce of any magical powers within me when i was in distress; i have done all that i could by myself always.

yes god is a reality even though we do not see it we know that there is a god and we believe in the Lord

So the magician and his rabbit didn't show up to wave his magic wand for you when you were in distress? Your poor ego, I'm so sorry for you.

Look, I've seen it with my own eyes looking out over the horizon; the Earth is flat. I feel no motion when standing still; the Earth is motionless. A curved rainbow could not form without a curved mirror; the Earth is covered by a mirrored dome. The Sun, Moon, stars and planets are all projected off the domes surface. We are inside an engineered structure and we're not here by accident.

Absolutely brainwashed heathen atheist.

Big Bang, Evolution and being within an engineered structure are not mutually exclusive.

I think life was created by a universe - without any god, without any creator .

If the universe created life, then the universe would be the creator.

I dont believe in the god that resides in the temple/church/mosque.

God is the creator of all things, He has infinite power on infinite time and space.

FLAT EARTH - Galileo vs. The Church: A Hegelian Dialectic -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zap8D_nKnb8 (https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=zap8D_nKnb8)

God is love!
Love is real!
 ;D

Its a really complicated matter to talk on. Actually God is present or not isnt yet scientifically proven; but it is proven that something called soul exists.

Science can't really prove anything, it just makes very educated guesses based on empirical evidence. But no amount of evidence for a case can negate the possibility of a case being false.

God is real but never talks with us

That is the thing many individuals don't generally comprehend about science. Researcher don't skew the outcomes to demonstrate their thoughts.

There's nothing amiss with being off-base as a researcher. Without a doubt, you may have quite recently squandered the most recent 15 years attempting.

god is love

God is reality.
Many people know it.
Devils and angels know it.

The point isn't that God is reality. The point is how to become one of His children, rather than one of His enemies.

8)

It depends how you look at this. I think a human should believe in any God to let him be your guiding light.

Haha! the guy has kept all the threads to his self moderately thread and he does not want to go out of control. There has to be some kind of control on such th

No one really know, but i believe god is available

Yes, Allah favors us. He gives everything in our lives. We will worship Him alone. No other than that.

I do not believe in all these things and I am a realist. I believe in  things that exist and I don’t believe in self made things. 

I believe that God is a reality

God is Alpha and Omega (The beginning and the end of all things).
My Savior, My King (No other greater God except Him).

I don’t think God is reality. God is a fictional character created by humans and people are creating more and more such gods according to their convenience.   

If you think about it.. I mean at one point in our reality somewhere had to be the start, whats before big bang, whats before that, etc, etc and you soon get to a point where something had to start existing out of nowhere in nowhere, like it had to imagine itself, from nothing to nothing. Maybe particle or anything could be called a "god". But how much it influences our daily life, if at all, no one knows.

I think God is real, as we have seen magics happening in our day to day life.

God may be real because bibles which are also a historical evidents encrypts about existence of jesus

aliens are real, so how is God not real, just an alien that happened to put us on this planet because He happens to be he master of the laws of science and nature.

If you have Faith, You believe in God. if you have God. You have faith. that's the reality of life.

There is no such thing as God as we the people have created them for selfish reasons.

God is there and he watches everything you do and say and how you behave.

Gods are needed in the world as they are the ones who will keep things intact.

I do not believe that God is not real. It is a fabricated story

Yes! i believe God is a reality. Whole of the system that is working flawlessly in this universe is quite an enough evidence for getting an assurance that there is someone controlling everything.

Most of the people in the world(like 90%) believe in God, the other 5% are don't sure and the rest 5% are atheist. But, did the believers really believe in Him, or what are the others 10% who are not sure or maybe didn't believe?

I was grown up in a orthodox family and I never think to check in what I am really believe or did I really believe until last year... During my 1 year research I realize that I am believer, but the way I believe and how should I really believe was so wrong

After I research the Yoga and The Bible, I open the door of the spiritual world and all I can say you people

Boys and girls, don't believe what the media or the people who are leading the temples tell you how you should believe, instead, go research the Yoga and the Bible and you will see that everything they told you was sow wrong.

It's too bad you did not truly engage with the article; now I will have to quote from it in reply to you. Fortunately, this makes my task easier, but I would prefer an engaging conversation.

In the AWARE study, consciousness and awareness appeared to occur during a three-minute period when there was no heartbeat. This is paradoxical, since the brain typically ceases functioning within 20-30 seconds of the heart stopping and doesn’t resume again until the heart has been restarted.

So which god is the real one ?

Scientifically proof that God exists and there are many examples some are. A person is born he will definitely die one day and nothing can stop him from dying when his times come the other examples are the sun, moon, stars, oceans, mountains, lava's and others they are not made by humans.

Yes God is Real. We need to believe it that He will be coming soon.

I do not believe in all these things and I am a realist. I believe in  things that exist and I don’t believe in self made things.

This is the thing that many people don’t understand about God and they don’t care.

Everyone has their own beliefs. Great faith will always be present and it is the truth in your heart and vice versa. If you believe in god, there will be god.

You cannot avoid the God as they are important and makes a lot of difference. 

Many indian religious books which are history books in same flanks says about existence of God

Dont know whether God existed or not but surely there is some mystical power prevailing in the world that is maintaining stability of our universe

God is a fictional character created by humans to make their life easy.

If it doesn't exist how did you think of it?  You connected to the reality where it does exist.

God is real only in your consciousness

There is some power that exists in the universe and the power is the God’s power.

It's like a sect where it's not clear what the creator of the branch believes more - God or Bitcoin Almighty...

As for God, I believe in God, our Lord Jesus Christ. I am Orthodox Christian.
God is love. God is kindness. Faith in God gives happiness, harmony and freedom.

I am a very religious person and I believe in God, and i think it is a reality.

yes,
God is real we can prove with all His unity, with all His creation, with all His grace and mercy, with all His qualities, which we have learned in our religious book.

Though might the God is not present but assuming his presence makes us bound to our limit of sins

God id real, only when we want it to be real otherwise it is not real and doesn’t exist.

God is absolutely real.

Consider things in the universe. Almost everything we understand has to do with the earth. And almost everything we understand on the earth has to do with material things.

What is so important about this? Look at a hydrogen atom, the smallest of all atoms. It is made up of a proton in its center, and an electron spinning around the proton, almost like a planet moves around the sun.

Imagine that you could enlarge a hydrogen atom, so that the proton was like a pinpoint that you could barely see in the palm of your hand. How far away from the proton would the electron be moving around the proton? Something like 100 feet, give or take.

What would be between the proton and the electron whirling around it 100 feet away? Nothing. Empty space.

By far the greatest amount of the universe is made up of empty space... and we almost have no clue at all as to what empty space is. But God made the whole universe.

Now much greater than we are, is God? God is at least billions or trillions of times greater than we are, than we are greater than a microbe. God might even be infinitely greater than we are.

God is the reality. We are not. We don't even exist except that God holds the universe in place.

8)

"God" is what the brainwashed call Science.

Yes, it is that simple.   :)

"God" is what ignorant people are trying to be when they suggest that God doesn't exist.

Yes, it is that simple.

8)

god is invisible but there is. the evidence of this real nature exists and can be felt. all god's creation is always special one of them small ant but can live have organs and can reprodoksi and reproduce. it is very beautiful his creation is not there to match it

In ancient Greece philosophers called the unfathomable void (zen) the prime substance when trying to attribute it some quality  Air, Ether, Fire, Water,
One could theorize  that the phrase God describes the whole area of the mystical which as well as physical world has its laws .  Being in need to address this concept it was called God . (due to its utmost complexity ) ... I could try to follow on this thought of the laws rules involved and their great multitude and complexity thus for doing good you get good karma and for doing bad u get bad karma ......!"£$%^& in generall it was called god ,.... ( when a sage gets a belly full he becomes an ordinary man ).....  The thing about sages, prophets and the like when they discover emptiness they get attached to it and obviously trying to explain emptiness  is 1 pointless like trying to describe taste of water  2 they rather stay submerged in the bliss of the ONE and keep their trap shut....


ps VOD i am one and same guy true that i copy and paste a bit maybe a bit to much .... I am grateful nevertheless  that thanks to your report i noticed your posts this thread and was able to share my theories with you and hopefully getting some feed back ( i hope you found my steemit/medium article entertaining as my intention was)

Regards Luke

god is invisible but there is. the evidence of this real nature exists and can be felt. all god's creation is always special one of them small ant but can live have organs and can reprodoksi and reproduce. it is very beautiful his creation is not there to match it

If you want to believe in a creator of everything....believe in it. And religion should be a persons private thing....dont force others to believe in what you believe. Its in your head and should stay there. We have seen the consequences in the past (and also nowadays) of forcing somebody to believe in something "divine".

Of course there is a god, let's think lights, thomas alfa edison is what makes the first lamp, if the light is made by humans then how about earth, galaxy and universe, surely someone who made it, and no one can make everything except god almighty

God exists and he is watching your every step and supporting you.

Yes, God is real, I do believe that He is our Creator and that he is real.

God is a creation of a human mind to make themselves feel good.

God exists, and he watches everything you do and guides you.

Putin in Russia is reality)

When speaking god and religion I prefer to be silent, because I am only a foolish man and fearing wrong when speaking god and religion.

There’s an unidentified power in the world and the power is of the God.

I believe in God.  You'd be crazy not to believe in God, but I guess some people are atheist

A believer in God, we call it real, if he does have reasons that support his belief more than his unbelief, so that is a kind of "proof".
To prove that God works in the world can be appointed
to the world and everything in it that is God's creation. That water flows, the wind blows, the tree grows, the child is born, it is all included in the work of God. And in fact in this case only one answer: the existence of God can not be proved, but experienced and recognized. And in this case a person is called rational, if he believes his experience

You see the ground, can touch and squeeze it. you see water, can touch it but you can not squeeze. you see fire, you can not touch it even squeeze it, but you can feel it, the heat caused by the fire. think. you can feel the wind but you can not see and touch the wind. surely you can not squeeze it. Land, water, fire, wind and everything. including your own parents created by God. Do you expect God to be like your Mother? Or you do not believe in God. Then who created your mother? maybe you answered your grandma. then who created your grandmother? If you answered your great-grandfather. Your answer is no different from a boy who is still in elementary school. keep in mind that GOD IS NOT SIMPLE WITH SOMETHING

God is a fictional character created to satisfy the human needs.

Yes he is for real and he is everywhere. those who are reading this, God is in you also.

God is true. If you will have faith that He really exists, you will be changed by Him.

There are many people who think God is real and he was a human too but it is not true.

Nope! God is not real. I am a complete atheist and I will be biased about it.

God is real. Atheist  are just foolish claims.

God is a fictional character created by humans to make their life easy.

Its ok to to believe God because it gives us mind peace if we do so

There is some power that exists in the universe and the power is the God’s power.

There is no such thing as God as we the people have created them for selfish reasons.

I think God is real, as we have seen magics happening in our day to day life.

I dont know of the topic because i also failed to find the answer myself

This science has not proven. But I still believe in religion, Christianity, Buddhism ... etc

God is exist. I believe that God is truly exist there are many proofs in our history that prove we have a God. I don't believe in science theory because even science can't prove there theories.

we can only believe in a god even though we can not see it with eyes, I think god is not just a praised statue, we can only believe it, I also believe god only one

god if it is reality for my way of thinking there is a god who watches us from the sky and looks at our behavior and what we do in this world

Reality has proofs. You have proofs?

Yeah, interested in proofs too

god is will

We all know the existence of Jesus christ and he is now the God of christians; so it can be said that God exist

I dont think God exists. what exists is a divine power that infuses strength into every weak peoples heart

May be he or she is existing because there are still no solid prove about it. No one have seen the GOds ever

Its sometimes truely astonishing that how can a such a vast open space be made in which thousands of stars and planets exists.