Proof that God exists

[BADecker]

I just wanted to mention, that anyone who has been fooled into believing that science theory is fact, has been fooled by religion.

How did I know you were going to ignore my previous post?

Random question...

Were you home schooled, or did you go to a private Christian/Catholic school?

Why do you keep focusing on the two of us... (useless comment clipped)

Because you continue to fail at providing evidence/proof which meets the standards of science:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frye_standard

Linking to Christian propaganda videos does not help your case... those sources you linked are the very definition of pseudoscience... I refuted the first 60 seconds, and there was no point watching further since it was obviously deliberate misinformation...

I also asked you to queue up the math portion so I could refute that separately... Why have you refused to do this?

You say that you could refute something, but you haven't. That's okay, of course. So, what does that have to do with focusing on us rather than focusing on the fact that the existence of God has been scientifically proven?

[Moloch]

I just wanted to mention, that anyone who has been fooled into believing that science theory is fact, has been fooled by religion.

How did I know you were going to ignore my previous post?

Random question...

Were you home schooled, or did you go to a private Christian/Catholic school?

Why do you keep focusing on the two of us... (useless comment clipped)

Because you continue to fail at providing evidence/proof which meets the standards of science:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frye_standard

Linking to Christian propaganda videos does not help your case... those sources you linked are the very definition of pseudoscience... I refuted the first 60 seconds, and there was no point watching further since it was obviously deliberate misinformation...

I also asked you to queue up the math portion so I could refute that separately... Why have you refused to do this?

You say that you could refute something, but you haven't. That's okay, of course. So, what does that have to do with focusing on us rather than focusing on the fact that the existence of God has been scientifically proven?

I suppose I'll repost this since you seem to have forgotten already

When you watch, for example, the Youtube video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhYsOQTfYEc, you find that Big Bang and Black Hole theory contradict themselves and each other. Since they contradict, they are nonsense.

Sorry, I tried to watch the 2 hour video you linked, but after 60 seconds I had to stop... The guy claimed that we have never witnessed the event horizon of a black hole, which is simply untrue... If his initial premise is a lie, his entire argument fails

We have observed black holes via telescope and we can see the event horizon. We can also see the predicted gravitational lensing of stars behind the black hole, which shows the theory has accurate predictive qualities (required to be considered a theory)
http://www.space.com/31548-event-horizon-telescope-black-hole-photos.html

He then goes on to claim that according to black hole theory, all matter should be inside the black hole, and that there cannot be more than 1 black hole
It's a shame we just built a brand new telescope to study black holes since there is only 1 of them, eh?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_black_holes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_massive_black_holes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_quasars

Guy does not have a clue...

You keep making the claim that there is scientific proof that God exists, yet you fail to provide this proof every time you are asked for it

You do not even understand the rigorous requirements for your evidence to be accepted by the scientific community

If you ever provide actual scientific evidence, or provide a link to a source for such evidence, I will gladly look at it and refute it...

But, if the best you have is propaganda/lies, you have nothing with substance worthy of debate

Why not google some of the "facts" in his video?  Don't take my word for it... do some research... consult google... google will enlighten you to exactly how wrong this guy is... I found 3 blatant lies in the first 60 seconds...




Also note, and this is very important!!!
Pay attention to his speech patterns... you will notice that he is talking as if to a child... exactly the same tone that many religious preachers use... exactly the same tone that many con-artists use... it is the way people unconsciously talk when they know they are feeding you bullshit, and hope you are not smart enough to call shenanigans

[BADecker]

I just wanted to mention, that anyone who has been fooled into believing that science theory is fact, has been fooled by religion.

How did I know you were going to ignore my previous post?

Random question...

Were you home schooled, or did you go to a private Christian/Catholic school?

Why do you keep focusing on the two of us... (useless comment clipped)

Because you continue to fail at providing evidence/proof which meets the standards of science:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frye_standard

Now what does your failing to provide evidence/proof, or your linking to a propaganda Wikipedia article have to do with focusing on us rather than rebutting the scientific proof that God exists?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence — Marcello Truzzi

That's exactly the reason why big bang and black hole theory is nonsense. The evidence for their existence is so extraordinary that it is entirely contradictory and nonsense.

Linking to Christian propaganda videos does not help your case... those sources you linked are the very definition of pseudoscience... I refuted the first 60 seconds, and there was no point watching further since it was obviously deliberate misinformation...

That's why I haven't done this. Yet you continue to link to religious articles in Wikipedia, and believe unproven scientific theories, showing that you are deeply into religion.

I also asked you to queue up the math portion (which you claim proves something) so I could refute that separately... Why have you refused to do this?

For the same reason that you haven't watched the video.

However, the math is so simple, that even you, a math major or whatever, could figure it out from the words.

Three different big bang theories, plus 4 black hole theories that could only exist in different universes than the big bang theories express, plus the fact that not all the black holes could exists simultaneously in the same universe, equals big bang/black hole nonsense. If the nonsense is believed, the believer has a false religion going for himself.

[valta4065]

I just wanted to mention, that anyone who has been fooled into believing that science theory is fact, has been fooled by religion.

How did I know you were going to ignore my previous post?

Random question...

Were you home schooled, or did you go to a private Christian/Catholic school?

Why do you keep focusing on the two of us, rather than continuing to say that you have debunked the proof that God exists found in combining the 3 scientific laws, when you really haven't debunked anything?:
1. Cause and effect;
2. Complex universe;
3. Universal complexity.

I feel like it's already the 4th time I ask this but...

Why do you believe those 3 laws are proven? Where is your proof of those 3 laws?

[mainpmf]

yes god exist and there are profs like who created nature who did the big bang who created you and when bad things happens to you doesn't mean he hates you everything happens has its own reason.

Then who created God?

[BADecker]

I just wanted to mention, that anyone who has been fooled into believing that science theory is fact, has been fooled by religion.

How did I know you were going to ignore my previous post?

Random question...

Were you home schooled, or did you go to a private Christian/Catholic school?

Why do you keep focusing on the two of us... (useless comment clipped)

Because you continue to fail at providing evidence/proof which meets the standards of science:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frye_standard

Linking to Christian propaganda videos does not help your case... those sources you linked are the very definition of pseudoscience... I refuted the first 60 seconds, and there was no point watching further since it was obviously deliberate misinformation...

I also asked you to queue up the math portion so I could refute that separately... Why have you refused to do this?

You say that you could refute something, but you haven't. That's okay, of course. So, what does that have to do with focusing on us rather than focusing on the fact that the existence of God has been scientifically proven?

I suppose I'll repost this since you seem to have forgotten already

When you watch, for example, the Youtube video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhYsOQTfYEc, you find that Big Bang and Black Hole theory contradict themselves and each other. Since they contradict, they are nonsense.

Sorry, I tried to watch the 2 hour video you linked, but after 60 seconds I had to stop... The guy claimed that we have never witnessed the event horizon of a black hole, which is simply untrue... If his initial premise is a lie, his entire argument fails

We have observed black holes via telescope and we can see the event horizon. We can also see the predicted gravitational lensing of stars behind the black hole, which shows the theory has accurate predictive qualities (required to be considered a theory)
http://www.space.com/31548-event-horizon-telescope-black-hole-photos.html

He then goes on to claim that according to black hole theory, all matter should be inside the black hole, and that there cannot be more than 1 black hole
It's a shame we just built a brand new telescope to study black holes since there is only 1 of them, eh?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_black_holes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_massive_black_holes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_quasars

Guy does not have a clue...

You keep making the claim that there is scientific proof that God exists, yet you fail to provide this proof every time you are asked for it

You do not even understand the rigorous requirements for your evidence to be accepted by the scientific community

If you ever provide actual scientific evidence, or provide a link to a source for such evidence, I will gladly look at it and refute it...

But, if the best you have is propaganda/lies, you have nothing with substance worthy of debate

There you go, listing a batch of Wikipedia posted propaganda again.

Why not google some of the "facts" in his video?  Don't take my word for it... do some research... consult google... google will enlighten you to exactly how wrong this guy is... I found 3 blatant lies in the first 60 seconds...

Since you can't even understand that scientific theory is not fact, why Google anything? The theory/fact lies have been around long enough, and have embedded themselves deeply enough, that Google might say just about anything regarding this.

The first 60 seconds of the video are so brief that the things said can be interpreted in many ways. You can probably find ways of interpreting them that are not truth. That's you, not the video. Why? Because the things said can be interpreted in ways that show that they are truth, as well.

Also note, and this is very important!!!
Pay attention to his speech patterns... you will notice that he is talking as if to a child... exactly the same tone that many religious preachers use... exactly the same tone that many con-artists use... it is the way people unconsciously talk when they know they are feeding you bullshit, and hope you are not smart enough to call shenanigans

Fortunately, the clarifications that he made, point out things that we all should have thought of long ago. Silly us. We wanted to believe in scientific theories. Now he shows us how some of the greatest science theories are completely false and misleading.

Actually, I have wondered for a long time if Hawking is actually doing his own thinking, or if he is being fed some political garbage that he spits out to us in the form of theories. The clarification that not only I recognize the nonsense in some of the things that Hawking says, makes me question his sanity a whole lot more... especially in the light of his needing to eat, as well as desiring recognition.

[BADecker]

yes god exist and there are profs like who created nature who did the big bang who created you and when bad things happens to you doesn't mean he hates you everything happens has its own reason.

Then who created God?

Creating is a thing that happened to this universe. God is outside this universe.

IF something created God, we could not recognize that type of creating as creating, simply because it is extremely outside of our thinking. The closest we can come to understanding God's existence is to say that He always existed.

[BADecker]

I just wanted to mention, that anyone who has been fooled into believing that science theory is fact, has been fooled by religion.

How did I know you were going to ignore my previous post?

Random question...

Were you home schooled, or did you go to a private Christian/Catholic school?

Why do you keep focusing on the two of us, rather than continuing to say that you have debunked the proof that God exists found in combining the 3 scientific laws, when you really haven't debunked anything?:
1. Cause and effect;
2. Complex universe;
3. Universal complexity.

I feel like it's already the 4th time I ask this but...

Why do you believe those 3 laws are proven? Where is your proof of those 3 laws?

They are proven in the fact that they are in evidence everywhere, without any known contradictions to them. That's why you find men of science calling them laws rather than theories or hypotheses.

[BADecker]

...
The important things, like proving that God exists, are things that are self-evident to anybody who searches for the references using the things that I say. The only people that they are not self-evident to are people who are not very good thinkers, or those who don't want to see and don't look.

Or it is self-evident only to already deluded people.

No, God is evident to all people. However, some of the more educated people have deluded and brainwashed themselves so that they barely recognize God anymore.

[mainpmf]

yes god exist and there are profs like who created nature who did the big bang who created you and when bad things happens to you doesn't mean he hates you everything happens has its own reason.

Then who created God?

Creating is a thing that happened to this universe. God is outside this universe.

IF something created God, we could not recognize that type of creating as creating, simply because it is extremely outside of our thinking. The closest we can come to understanding God's existence is to say that He always existed.

So can't we say that BigBang was created by something outside the universe without it being God? Why should we admit that God can have always existed and then decided to create something, but not that the BigBang is something that was outside the universe and suddenly created something?

[mainpmf]

I just wanted to mention, that anyone who has been fooled into believing that science theory is fact, has been fooled by religion.

How did I know you were going to ignore my previous post?

Random question...

Were you home schooled, or did you go to a private Christian/Catholic school?

Why do you keep focusing on the two of us, rather than continuing to say that you have debunked the proof that God exists found in combining the 3 scientific laws, when you really haven't debunked anything?:
1. Cause and effect;
2. Complex universe;
3. Universal complexity.

I feel like it's already the 4th time I ask this but...

Why do you believe those 3 laws are proven? Where is your proof of those 3 laws?

They are proven in the fact that they are in evidence everywhere, without any known contradictions to them. That's why you find men of science calling them laws rather than theories or hypotheses.

Wrong. You know you denied quantum physics as a law? Well if quantum physics is not a law, then the cause and effect isn't true as simple as that. We discovered phenomenon where consequence happens before the cause. Unless quantum physics is true. Your choice buddy, but both can't be true.

[BADecker]

yes god exist and there are profs like who created nature who did the big bang who created you and when bad things happens to you doesn't mean he hates you everything happens has its own reason.

Then who created God?

Creating is a thing that happened to this universe. God is outside this universe.

IF something created God, we could not recognize that type of creating as creating, simply because it is extremely outside of our thinking. The closest we can come to understanding God's existence is to say that He always existed.

So can't we say that BigBang was created by something outside the universe without it being God? Why should we admit that God can have always existed and then decided to create something, but not that the BigBang is something that was outside the universe and suddenly created something?

First, people can and do say many things. The big bang is not law, it is guesswork.

There are many untold things that might have happened in the universe that could make big bang to be non-existent. The universe is open to all kinds of ideas that might be developed to contradict big bang, if people were interested in developing them.

Black hole theory doesn't match big bang theory in any ways that would allow the two to fit together in the same universe. Watch some of the Stephen Crothers videos on Youtube to see this.

[BADecker]

I just wanted to mention, that anyone who has been fooled into believing that science theory is fact, has been fooled by religion.

How did I know you were going to ignore my previous post?

Random question...

Were you home schooled, or did you go to a private Christian/Catholic school?

Why do you keep focusing on the two of us, rather than continuing to say that you have debunked the proof that God exists found in combining the 3 scientific laws, when you really haven't debunked anything?:
1. Cause and effect;
2. Complex universe;
3. Universal complexity.

I feel like it's already the 4th time I ask this but...

Why do you believe those 3 laws are proven? Where is your proof of those 3 laws?

They are proven in the fact that they are in evidence everywhere, without any known contradictions to them. That's why you find men of science calling them laws rather than theories or hypotheses.

Wrong. You know you denied quantum physics as a law? Well if quantum physics is not a law, then the cause and effect isn't true as simple as that. We discovered phenomenon where consequence happens before the cause. Unless quantum physics is true. Your choice buddy, but both can't be true.

I did not deny QP as law. After all, it exists, doesn't it?

All I am saying about QP is, any results that it provides are completely guesswork as to whether or not the results are law... until the results are proven through some scientific method other than QP.

[mainpmf]

I just wanted to mention, that anyone who has been fooled into believing that science theory is fact, has been fooled by religion.

How did I know you were going to ignore my previous post?

Random question...

Were you home schooled, or did you go to a private Christian/Catholic school?

Why do you keep focusing on the two of us, rather than continuing to say that you have debunked the proof that God exists found in combining the 3 scientific laws, when you really haven't debunked anything?:
1. Cause and effect;
2. Complex universe;
3. Universal complexity.

I feel like it's already the 4th time I ask this but...

Why do you believe those 3 laws are proven? Where is your proof of those 3 laws?

They are proven in the fact that they are in evidence everywhere, without any known contradictions to them. That's why you find men of science calling them laws rather than theories or hypotheses.

Wrong. You know you denied quantum physics as a law? Well if quantum physics is not a law, then the cause and effect isn't true as simple as that. We discovered phenomenon where consequence happens before the cause. Unless quantum physics is true. Your choice buddy, but both can't be true.

I did not deny QP as law. After all, it exists, doesn't it?

All I am saying about QP is, any results that it provides are completely guesswork as to whether or not the results are law... until the results are proven through some scientific method other than QP.

So QP is a law but the results of this law are not correct? 
What kind of law is that?

[BADecker]

I just wanted to mention, that anyone who has been fooled into believing that science theory is fact, has been fooled by religion.

How did I know you were going to ignore my previous post?

Random question...

Were you home schooled, or did you go to a private Christian/Catholic school?

Why do you keep focusing on the two of us, rather than continuing to say that you have debunked the proof that God exists found in combining the 3 scientific laws, when you really haven't debunked anything?:
1. Cause and effect;
2. Complex universe;
3. Universal complexity.

I feel like it's already the 4th time I ask this but...

Why do you believe those 3 laws are proven? Where is your proof of those 3 laws?

They are proven in the fact that they are in evidence everywhere, without any known contradictions to them. That's why you find men of science calling them laws rather than theories or hypotheses.

Wrong. You know you denied quantum physics as a law? Well if quantum physics is not a law, then the cause and effect isn't true as simple as that. We discovered phenomenon where consequence happens before the cause. Unless quantum physics is true. Your choice buddy, but both can't be true.

I did not deny QP as law. After all, it exists, doesn't it?

All I am saying about QP is, any results that it provides are completely guesswork as to whether or not the results are law... until the results are proven through some scientific method other than QP.

So QP is a law but the results of this law are not correct?  
What kind of law is that?

QP is law just like probability is law. They both exist don't they? If they didn't exist, they certainly would not be law. If we didn't know for sure that they existed, they might not be law, or they might. We know that QP exists. We use it all the time these days. QP is law.

QP doesn't provide facts when it is used. It can't be used to provide anything factual. This is not its purpose.

The purpose of QP is to find things that are possibilities. It does this through probability methods. Properly used it can find ways to determine anything to be a possibility. It can be used to show how contradictory things might be possible at the same time.

The things that QP show as possibilities must be proven some other way to determine if they are real, fact or law... because QP can only be used to show possibilities and probabilities.

[mrflibblehat]

So I should either walk to work or move with a tent inside the company's yard and be evolved by doing this, of course?

You ask me this? Shouldn't you evaluate this on your own, according to the things that you desire, and at least consult the company about if they will let you do this?

Besides, if you do, do something like this, it will not make you less devolved. It might only indicate that you are way more devolved than anybody had thought.

Still, you haven't answered my question. Will I be more evolved if I stop using my car or not? Enlighten me, oh great one, how to be more evolved, just like the cave people?

The guy does not have any proofs.  His knowledge of science and bible is very superficial.  He represents an average Christian.

He just talked himself into believing in "Lord Jesus Christ", whatever that means.  It was probably inspired by church ceremonies, cool paintings in the church etc.
Music, beautiful paintings, some nice passages in the Bible gave him enough to create this hallucination.

I'm sure he feels and sees Jesus in everything.  The nonsense he is spouting is a combination of his own imagination and what he heard from other people in his church.
When confronted on his bullshit, he refuses to debate, diverts attention to some minor detail in Bible or science and asserts he is right and everybody is wrong.

Don't get me wrong. I'd love for God to be real. To know after death we won't turn to dust. To see loved lost ones again. it would be wonderful. I would be the greatest believer. But I'm afraid it's just not true.

Since the resurrection hasn't happened yet, and since it is built only on a promise, isn't it logical to at least force yourself to believe it in some way? I mean, since you would like it if it were true, what do you have to lose? You can still go on living almost as enjoyably as you do now, and possibly more enjoyably. Why not force yourself to believe?

Because it is an insult to my intellect. Just like Santa. At least "he" brings presents.

If you think that being insulted is more important than the possibility of being saved, you have already insulted your intellect way more than you could do by attempting to believe something that you think is nonsense... especially when there is no way that you can prove it is nonsense.

You did see me say insults my intellect, did you not? What that means is that it's not only unbearable but also demeaning. I won't be making things that make me feel stupid. It's self respect.

[mrflibblehat]

The moment people clearly and logically argue that you're wrong you start insulting them. That's not nice mr. christian dude.

Now you are calling af_newbie a Christian. Don't yo think that he might be insulted by that?

I was talking about you, not him. Didn't want to quote again. Either way you'll understand what you want.

Yabut, it's fun watching you squirm a little bit.   

How about we all just ignore you from this moment on? It's just a question. Not sure what to do since you're so funny.
I mean we can talk, ok. Just keep it civilized.
Alrighty then.

I agree. Keep on with what you are doing. Something I might say just might get across to you and help you to be saved after all.

And again, just like Jehova's Witnesses you want to "help" me. Did I ask for your help? Do I look helpless? Are we family? No.
You want to help me? Buy a bread for me each day, everyday. It will show more than anything you could say here.

[mrflibblehat]

So I came across this passage, and I was wondering if BADecker could interpret...

29 The jailer called for lights, rushed in and fell trembling before Paul and Silas.
30 He then brought them out and asked, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
31 They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household.”

Is this saying that if I believe in Jesus, my entire family is saved?

I recall other parts of the bible stating that salvation was a personal matter, and that my personal faith could not save my family, only they can save themselves?

Seems like a contradiction here... and being that salvation through Jesus is the core of Christianity, you'd think they would be consistent throughout the bible, right?

As long as you are searching for contradictions, you will never see much of anything else in anything.

Translation:
Fuck if I know

Well, obviously you don't know. If you had, you wouldn't have consulted me, who you have shown over and over that you don't believe anyway. This also shows your inability to rationally calculate much of anything.

First off, I am not consulting you, I am interrogating you

Chuckle. So you think that you are interrogating me. Chuckle.    

Now that you mention it, ridicule might be a better word...

I can't be interrogating you since you have no information worth hearing

Why, Moloch. Thank you for the attempted ridicule. It only helps to boost my accuracy, since you have shown that you don't have anything to base your ridicule of me on.

Excepting that nearly every post I make links to sources and evidence proving you wrong...

I don't recall you ever posting a source or evidence, you simply repeat your own failed hypothesis

Much of what you say is inconsequential. Why would I want to get in the way of your silly beliefs?

The important things, like proving that God exists, are things that are self-evident to anybody who searches for the references using the things that I say. The only people that they are not self-evident to are people who are not very good thinkers, or those who don't want to see and don't look.

So what you're saying is that people who don't "find" God are stupid? That's a new low, even for you.

[BADecker]

So I came across this passage, and I was wondering if BADecker could interpret...

29 The jailer called for lights, rushed in and fell trembling before Paul and Silas.
30 He then brought them out and asked, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
31 They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household.”

Is this saying that if I believe in Jesus, my entire family is saved?

I recall other parts of the bible stating that salvation was a personal matter, and that my personal faith could not save my family, only they can save themselves?

Seems like a contradiction here... and being that salvation through Jesus is the core of Christianity, you'd think they would be consistent throughout the bible, right?

As long as you are searching for contradictions, you will never see much of anything else in anything.

Translation:
Fuck if I know

Well, obviously you don't know. If you had, you wouldn't have consulted me, who you have shown over and over that you don't believe anyway. This also shows your inability to rationally calculate much of anything.

First off, I am not consulting you, I am interrogating you

Chuckle. So you think that you are interrogating me. Chuckle.    

Now that you mention it, ridicule might be a better word...

I can't be interrogating you since you have no information worth hearing

Why, Moloch. Thank you for the attempted ridicule. It only helps to boost my accuracy, since you have shown that you don't have anything to base your ridicule of me on.

Excepting that nearly every post I make links to sources and evidence proving you wrong...

I don't recall you ever posting a source or evidence, you simply repeat your own failed hypothesis

Much of what you say is inconsequential. Why would I want to get in the way of your silly beliefs?

The important things, like proving that God exists, are things that are self-evident to anybody who searches for the references using the things that I say. The only people that they are not self-evident to are people who are not very good thinkers, or those who don't want to see and don't look.

So what you're saying is that people who don't "find" God are stupid? That's a new low, even for you.

Haven't you found God? No? Well, then I would have to agree with what you say about yourself.

[mrflibblehat]

As many have repeated before me: show us scientific, demonstrable proof. Proof that we can test. And each test to provide the same result. Something that we can put math on. Not guesswork. The computer you use, it was not made by guessing. It's something precise.
The 3 arguments that you've provided have nothing to do with the existence of an entity that has all its attributes to the absolute.
Maybe the universe is a big aquarium and aliens do tests on us. And the 13.7 billion /6.000 years of history are an accelerated dream.