Scientific proof that God exists?

[Przemax]

I don't believe anything. I've seen evidence pointing towards a big bang but I never claimed I know it happened 100% I also don't know if something else caused the big bang but then again, it's religious people that claim that god did with literally no evidence what bothers me.

Kabbalists knew about big bang and universe expansion since 12th century.

Maybe you are too confused to pee if you dont have evidence from a computer that you really want to pee.

Most science was discovered through logic and mathematics rather than with "evidences".

Then all science bother you, all religions bother you, you seem actually very bothered by everything lol.

You should trust more you imagination and not being so weary of thinking something might be true even if there is no evidence for it lol

If mr atheist claims anything could happen why wouldn't he claim that God might do it? I would say some serious hypnotist should be needed to get to his brain. His brain is somewhat programmed. He believe in big bang yet he dont believe it, yet something else can happen.... anything... But not the Bible story.

For me, thats psychiatric, or demonic at best. Its serious.... but not rational for sure.

I might be wrong and scientists might be wrong too but at least they are trying. They are always searching for new things to understand how the universe is created. Religious people like you, read a book and consider it true for some reason. That's whats wrong with you. I admit that I could be wrong but at least I'm trying to look at evidence and proof, hey maybe I interpreted it wrong but at least I'm not just claiming things out of air. Your god could happen just like a magic pixie could happen, no point in discussing any of it until there is solid evidence, otherwise we can just make up things over and over again and say, hey this could happen.

Not at all. You claim that your possition is default. Thats simply not true.

You claim there is a body of scientists that all agree there was a big bang. No. Just some tiny tiny tiny to the nth almost to infinity group of some wacko physicists. Most physicists dont give a crack about about that.

You claim I have no evidences. Wrong. I have tons of. Its self apparent to me, like to most healthy individual that "there is something out there that is concious". Its even in the us constitution that it is self explanatory there is some absolute.

Your point of view is schooled to you by jesuits. Atheism is a virus that is spread to be a devote of a magic word "science". Actually there is no such thing as science. There is a scientific method that your wacko physicians are not aplying for themselves.

You can package or repackage any absurd as science and noone would be able to verify if its true if there are only few specialists of that around the world. Scientific method should only be aplicable to someone who actually do science. Science should not be a word that you club others on the head like you are doing it.

You should club me with scientific method principles if I would claim to be scientific. And yes I had clubbed you with scientific principles mainly I had found a counter argument, when you claimed that science knows better. I had proven to you by clubbing you with scientific method that evolution is not scientific.

[Astargath]

I don't believe anything. I've seen evidence pointing towards a big bang but I never claimed I know it happened 100% I also don't know if something else caused the big bang but then again, it's religious people that claim that god did with literally no evidence what bothers me.

Kabbalists knew about big bang and universe expansion since 12th century.

Maybe you are too confused to pee if you dont have evidence from a computer that you really want to pee.

Most science was discovered through logic and mathematics rather than with "evidences".

Then all science bother you, all religions bother you, you seem actually very bothered by everything lol.

You should trust more you imagination and not being so weary of thinking something might be true even if there is no evidence for it lol

If mr atheist claims anything could happen why wouldn't he claim that God might do it? I would say some serious hypnotist should be needed to get to his brain. His brain is somewhat programmed. He believe in big bang yet he dont believe it, yet something else can happen.... anything... But not the Bible story.

For me, thats psychiatric, or demonic at best. Its serious.... but not rational for sure.

I might be wrong and scientists might be wrong too but at least they are trying. They are always searching for new things to understand how the universe is created. Religious people like you, read a book and consider it true for some reason. That's whats wrong with you. I admit that I could be wrong but at least I'm trying to look at evidence and proof, hey maybe I interpreted it wrong but at least I'm not just claiming things out of air. Your god could happen just like a magic pixie could happen, no point in discussing any of it until there is solid evidence, otherwise we can just make up things over and over again and say, hey this could happen.

Not at all. You claim that your possition is default. Thats simply not true.

You claim there is a body of scientists that all agree there was a big bang. No. Just some tiny tiny tiny to the nth almost to infinity group of some wacko physicists. Most physicists dont give a crack about about that.

You claim I have no evidences. Wrong. I have tons of. Its self apparent to me, like to most healthy individual that "there is something out there that is concious". Its even in the us constitution that it is self explanatory there is some absolute.

Your point of view is schooled to you by jesuits. Atheism is a virus that is spread to be a devote of a magic word "science". Actually there is no such thing as science. There is a scientific method that your wacko physicians are not aplying for themselves.

It is default, I simply don't believe in anything until I see it or until I find evidence for it or until trusted sources told me (This one is obviously dangerous but as a kid you would basically listen to anything your parents said) I don't see how my position is not default. You claim there is a god and I don't believe it because I don't see sufficient evidence for it.

You have tons of evidences, where are they. Self apparent to you, that's not evidence dummy. People believe in many things, there are lots of people who think there are ghosts, I guess that's also self apparent and we should all believe there are ghosts now? You believe in the bible just like muslims believe in the quran, how do you know your god is the real one?

[Przemax]

Evidence

noun
1.
that which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief; proof.
2.
something that makes plain or clear; an indication or sign:
His flushed look was visible evidence of his fever.

What definition don't you understand?

I found a lot of grounds upon my beliefs and a lot of indication and signs. There are so many that I do not even try to remember them. They are for me only, you might not understand me. They are deeply private Im shy to share with someone hostile to me. What don't you understand?

It is default, I simply don't believe in anything until I see it or until I find evidence for it or until trusted sources told me (This one is obviously dangerous but as a kid you would basically listen to anything your parents said) I don't see how my position is not default. You claim there is a god and I don't believe it because I don't see sufficient evidence for it.

Because we can't stand the nonsense of life. We need to have some greater purpose and we are hard wired to seek it. Like we are hard wired to find faces around us. We are deeply religious creatures.

Right now you think you are not driven by religion. You are. You are driven with the need to feel superiour than those "silly" religious people. Deep down inside you know there is a lion out there to eat your soul, but you want to be at least faster than those inferiour to you in your mind.

Your atheism is a religious feeling. Otherwise you would not give a fuck so much to debate with me.

I would call your religion Im betterism with a mix of scientism, schoolism and atheism. You would like to believe all of those are true. But thats a sign your religion is the ancient old Luciferanism, because of your narcistic tendencies. You just are not aware of it.

[Astargath]

Evidence

noun
1.
that which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief; proof.
2.
something that makes plain or clear; an indication or sign:
His flushed look was visible evidence of his fever.

What definition don't you understand?

I found a lot of grounds upon my beliefs and a lot of indication and signs. There are so many that I do not even try to remember them. They are for me only, you might not understand me. They are deeply private Im shy to share with someone hostile to me. What don't you understand?

It is default, I simply don't believe in anything until I see it or until I find evidence for it or until trusted sources told me (This one is obviously dangerous but as a kid you would basically listen to anything your parents said) I don't see how my position is not default. You claim there is a god and I don't believe it because I don't see sufficient evidence for it.

Because we can't stand the nonsense of life. We need to have some greater purpose and we are hard wired to seek it. Like we are hard wired to find faces around us. We are deeply religious creatures.

Right now you think you are not driven by religion. You are. You are driven with the need to feel superiour than those "silly" religious people. Deep down inside you know there is a lion out there to eat your soul, but you want to be at least faster than those inferiour to you in your mind.

Your atheism is a religious feeling. Otherwise you would not give a fuck so much to debate with me.

I would call your religion Im betterism with a mix of scientism, schoolism and atheism. You would like to believe all of those are true. But thats a sign your religion is the ancient old Luciferanism, because of your narcistic tendencies. You just are not aware of it.

Why don't you just admit that you have blind faith in your religion instead of writing this pile of trash ''
I found a lot of grounds upon my beliefs and a lot of indication and signs. There are so many that I do not even try to remember them. They are for me only, you might not understand me. They are deeply private Im shy to share with someone hostile to me. What don't you understand?''
Every single religious person will tell you the same thing, they all have proof of their beliefs yet they can't all be right.

[IadixDev]

There are so many differents models, theories and explanations behind any phenomena .. it's hard to see how evidence constitute a science of something. .

It would be more "scientific" to actually quote theorems, experimental protocol, publication etc than claiming stuff about "science" .

Especially in area such as cosmos creation, or evolution where there is no certainty, if there is even anything at all science can actually pretend to explain with absolute certitude, without approximation, or only isolating one aspect of things in a lab.

There is no physics model who can explain everything from big bang to mozart, not even close.

Theory about big bang are just theory at the same title than it's a magic unicorn who farted in the cosmos.

Between standard model, particule physics, quantum theories, the "4 main forces" of classic physics who are not even working well together, classic mechanics, chemistry, etc ..

It's more patchwork than anything, cant hardly be told to be really coherent as a whole.

Pretending otherwise is being delusional about science and idealizing it.

[qwik2learn]

In other words. If you speak about the God universe better be sure to stay within its boudary of truth and facts.

What exactly is the criteria for truth and facts?

[qwik2learn]

There are so many differents models, theories and explanations behind any phenomena .. it's hard to see how evidence constitute a science of something. .

It would be more "scientific" to actually quote theorems, experimental protocol, publication etc than claiming stuff about "science" .

Especially in area such as cosmos creation, or evolution where there is no certainty, if there is even anything at all science can actually pretend to explain with absolute certitude, without approximation, or only isolating one aspect of things in a lab.

There is no physics model who can explain everything from big bang to mozart, not even close.

Theory about big bang are just theory at the same title than it's a magic unicorn who farted in the cosmos.

Between standard model, particule physics, quantum theories, the "4 main forces" of classic physics who are not even working well together, classic mechanics, chemistry, etc ..

It's more patchwork than anything, cant hardly be told to be really coherent as a whole.

Pretending otherwise is being delusional about science and idealizing it.

The origin of life indicates the existence of a life force. An outside variable is necessary to account for the scientific model of abiogenesis.

The Improbability of Abiogenesis:
https://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/abiogenesis.html
More information at the Origin of Life Prize website.

[qwik2learn]

Evidence

noun
1.
that which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief; proof.
2.
something that makes plain or clear; an indication or sign:
His flushed look was visible evidence of his fever.

What definition don't you understand?

I found a lot of grounds upon my beliefs and a lot of indication and signs. There are so many that I do not even try to remember them. They are for me only, you might not understand me. They are deeply private Im shy to share with someone hostile to me. What don't you understand?

It is default, I simply don't believe in anything until I see it or until I find evidence for it or until trusted sources told me (This one is obviously dangerous but as a kid you would basically listen to anything your parents said) I don't see how my position is not default. You claim there is a god and I don't believe it because I don't see sufficient evidence for it.

Because we can't stand the nonsense of life. We need to have some greater purpose and we are hard wired to seek it. Like we are hard wired to find faces around us. We are deeply religious creatures.

Right now you think you are not driven by religion. You are. You are driven with the need to feel superiour than those "silly" religious people. Deep down inside you know there is a lion out there to eat your soul, but you want to be at least faster than those inferiour to you in your mind.

Your atheism is a religious feeling. Otherwise you would not give a fuck so much to debate with me.

I would call your religion Im betterism with a mix of scientism, schoolism and atheism. You would like to believe all of those are true. But thats a sign your religion is the ancient old Luciferanism, because of your narcistic tendencies. You just are not aware of it.

Why don't you just admit that you have blind faith in your religion instead of writing this pile of trash ''
I found a lot of grounds upon my beliefs and a lot of indication and signs. There are so many that I do not even try to remember them. They are for me only, you might not understand me. They are deeply private Im shy to share with someone hostile to me. What don't you understand?''
Every single religious person will tell you the same thing, they all have proof of their beliefs yet they can't all be right.

but what if your brain is just hooked up to a machine, like in the movie matrix, and all your facts are just some digital world in a computer

Some entities can be proven to exist and they have more knowledge or experience, it is via a transformation of one's being from finite to infinite that one can exit the matrix.

[IadixDev]

There are so many differents models, theories and explanations behind any phenomena .. it's hard to see how evidence constitute a science of something. .

It would be more "scientific" to actually quote theorems, experimental protocol, publication etc than claiming stuff about "science" .

Especially in area such as cosmos creation, or evolution where there is no certainty, if there is even anything at all science can actually pretend to explain with absolute certitude, without approximation, or only isolating one aspect of things in a lab.

There is no physics model who can explain everything from big bang to mozart, not even close.

Theory about big bang are just theory at the same title than it's a magic unicorn who farted in the cosmos.

Between standard model, particule physics, quantum theories, the "4 main forces" of classic physics who are not even working well together, classic mechanics, chemistry, etc ..

It's more patchwork than anything, cant hardly be told to be really coherent as a whole.

Pretending otherwise is being delusional about science and idealizing it.

The origin of life indicates the existence of a life force. An outside variable is necessary to account for the scientific model of abiogenesis.

The Improbability of Abiogenesis:
https://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/abiogenesis.html
More information at the Origin of Life Prize website.

Yeah, actually this stuff of life force is studied a bit on 19th science, through psychology etc, I think Freud somewhere talks about this sort of vital elan, that is also implied in darwin as "survival instinct" or so.

But the veda and budhism study this for very long time, as the prana, and integrate this as the center of science, instead of focusing on building machines for economic purpose as mean and end of science.

Andy pross also study this sort of question

http://wasdarwinwrong.com/korthof99.htm

But it's far to be really conclusive theory about this.

The primordial soup start to be more and more questioned today.

[IadixDev]

but what if your brain is just hooked up to a machine, like in the movie matrix, and all your facts are just some digital world in a computer

All reality and facts happen in the mind, all reality based on sense is virtual

You can never really know if you are in a dream, in a simulation etc.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_(illusion)

The Soul is imagined first, then the particularity of objects,
External and internal, as one knows so one remembers.
As a rope, not perceived distinctly in dark, is erroneously imagined,
As snake, as a streak of water, so is the Soul (Atman) erroneously imagined.
As when the rope is distinctly perceived, and the erroneous imagination withdrawn,
Only the rope remains, without a second, so when distinctly perceived, the Atman.
When he as Pranas (living beings), as all the diverse objects appears to us,
Then it is all mere Maya, with which the Brahman (Supreme Soul) deceives himself.

— Gaudapada, Māṇḍukya Kārikā 2.16-19 [39]


It is the confusion, ignorance and illusions that need to be repealed. It is only when the knower sees nothing else but his Self that he can be fearless and permanent.[47][48] Vivekananda explains the need to understand Maya as follows (abridged),[49]

The Vedas cannot show you Brahman, you are That already. They can only help to take away the veil that hides truth from our eyes. The cessation of ignorance can only come when I know that God and I are one; in other words, identify yourself with Atman, not with human limitations. The idea that we are bound is only an illusion [Maya]. Freedom is inseparable from the nature of the Atman. This is ever pure, ever perfect, ever unchangeable.

— Adi Shankara's commentary on Fourth Vyasa Sutra, Swami Vivekananda

But mathematics and logic remain the same nonetheless

Descartes say a bit this too, that only thoughts are real , all sensorial perception is deceptive.

Science is more intellectual process than based on sensorial perception, facts etc.

[BADecker]

Science is more intellectual process than based on sensorial perception, facts etc.

Intellectual process is sensorial perception of what is guessed to be other sensorial perception.

[Przemax]

Why don't you just admit that you have blind faith in your religion instead of writing this pile of trash ''
I found a lot of grounds upon my beliefs and a lot of indication and signs. There are so many that I do not even try to remember them. They are for me only, you might not understand me. They are deeply private Im shy to share with someone hostile to me. What don't you understand?''
Every single religious person will tell you the same thing, they all have proof of their beliefs yet they can't all be right.

Because I had a conclusion that people are based on four categories. Those who lie unknowigly, those admitting they don't know, those who lie, and those who had rejected the lies and tries to not make another. Truth is a process of throwing away the lies, not discovering something out of numbers. People lie. Its in your blood. You shoud always double check your fellow human. Thats why we have logic and brains.

I admitt I don't know where I don't know. You claim you know how universe was made. You believe scientists know. Scientist use highly sophisticated mathematical models. To know this evidence is to understand it. Are you a professor of mathematics? If no. You lie that you saw the evidence for big bang as it is only mathematical. You are a liar and nothing else. God had said that the liars will be against him. So you just evidenced for me I am on a right path.

Experimental physics is based on the fact that everything on micro scale and macro scale stays the same. Thats the proper science. There is no proof that is otherwise. If that would not be true all of the experimental science would be denied as not true.

The puritans had read their Bible. They knew people are not be trusted. But they wanted to know the truth. Thats how experimental science was made. And the God said it was good. lol. Alleluyah. And they were blessed with inventions and western civilisation.

There are some lockpicks from experimental science, that claims that some constant are constant without any single proof. I would like to remind thats not scientific method to have things unable to be verified, and build mathematical models based on a constant, that is found in one place only. To believe that requires a huge dose of leap of faith. I am fairly sure the atheists do not know how much in science we take for granted that is absolutely unverified, or simply lied.

In other words constants are their idol. And thats their faith. Why? Because people are liars, they will lie if allowed to.

There is absolutely no evidence in the proper science that macro scale level events cannot be imitated in the lab. So. If you say that big bang is evidenced outside of mathematics - that makes you a liar, again.

Noone is claiming to know, outside of kabbalists how the world was done. Big bang is a kabbalistic concept. In my opinion there is no difference between knowing how something is done and demonstrating it.

And thats the criterium of truth. Demonstration. Logic is the tool to show the lie.

You know how something is done? Show me.

P.S Why do you assume some books that claims to be holy are not? Christianity is a culture of scepticism not a blind faith. Muslims and Yews as well. We are all told that people are liars. Its the people that interpret it wrongly and make religions out of the Torah that are liars. God had made no religion. So you lie again. God had only give a message saying hello.

Jesus had that message in a nutshell. "Hello. Im the truth and a way. If you love me (the truth) you will keep my commandments.

See you later. "

The problem with religion is that it replace the God's word and his tradition with human traditions. And thats what people are laughing about. Nothing to laugh from God. Just from silly people that lie.

It does not say that lets say Sikh can not follow those commandments. I think some of them do. Why do say the truth was not shown to Sikh. They say to love one another. Thats almost right there. Do not discourage them.

[IadixDev]

Science is more intellectual process than based on sensorial perception, facts etc.

Intellectual process is sensorial perception of what is guessed to be other sensorial perception.

It's not perception of physical objects though

Philo of alexandria make the connection with the mind of god as the logos, as source of truth.

Plato speak of realm of idea similar to this.

Many says the concept of haeven in the bible is the same than those concept of realm of idea of Plato,  and mind of god of philo.

[IadixDev]

Why don't you just admit that you have blind faith in your religion instead of writing this pile of trash ''
I found a lot of grounds upon my beliefs and a lot of indication and signs. There are so many that I do not even try to remember them. They are for me only, you might not understand me. They are deeply private Im shy to share with someone hostile to me. What don't you understand?''
Every single religious person will tell you the same thing, they all have proof of their beliefs yet they can't all be right.

Because I had a conclusion that people are based on four cathegories. Those who lie unknowigly, those admitting they don't know, those who lie, and those who had rejected the lies and tries to not make another. Truth is a process of throwing away the lies, not discovering something out of numbers. People lie. Its in your blood. You shoud always double check your fellow human. Thats why we have logic and brains.

I admitt I don't know where I don't know. You claim you know how universe was made. You believe scientists know. Scientist use highly sophisticated mathematical models. To know this evidence is to understand it. Are you a professor of mathematics? If no. You lie that you saw the evidence for big bang as it is only mathematical. You are a liar and nothing else. God had said that the liars will be against him. So you just evidenced for me I am on a right path.

Experimental physics is based on the fact that everything on micro scale and macro scale stays the same. Thats the proper science. There is no proof that is otherwise. If that would not be true all of the experimental science would be denied as not true.

The puritans had read their Bible. They knew people are not be trusted. But they wanted to know the truth. Thats how experimental science was made. And the God said it was good. lol. Alleluyah. And they were blessed with inventions and western civilisation.

There are some lockpicks from experimental science, that claims that some constant are constant without any single proof. I would like to remind thats not scientific method to have things unable to be verified, and build mathematical models based on a constant, that is found in one place only. To believe that requires a huge dose of leap of faith. I am fairly sure the atheists do not know how much in science we take for granted that is absolutely unverified, or simply lied.

In other words constants are their idol. And thats their faith. Why? Because people are liars, they will lie if allowed to.

There is absolutely no evidence in the proper science that macro scale level events cannot be imitated in the lab. So. If you say that big bang is evidenced outside of mathematics - that makes you a liar, again.

Noone is claiming to know, outside of kabbalists how the world was done. Big bang is a kabbalistic concept. In my opinion there is no difference between knowing how something is done and demonstrating it.

And thats the criterium of truth. Demonstration. Logic is the tool to show the lie.

You know how something is done? Show me.

P.S Why do you assume some books that claims to be holy are not? Christianity is a culture of scepticism not a blind faith. Muslims and Yews as well. We are all told that people are liars. Its the people that interpret it wrongly and make religions out of the Torah that are liars. God had made no religion. So you lie again. God had only give a message saying hello.

Jesus had that message in a nutshell. "Hello. Im the truth and a way. If you love me (the truth) you will keep my commandments.

See you later. "

The problem with religion is that it replace the God's word and his tradition with human traditions. And thats what people are laughing about. Nothing to laugh from God. Just from silly people that lie.

It does not say that lets say Sikh can not follow those commandments. I think some of them do. Why do say the truth was not shown to Sikh. They say to love one another. Thats almost right there. Do not discourage them.

It's weird thing with the pseudo rationalist/scientific, they are expecting a result out of "science" without being able to explain how this result come out , but still saying it's due to "science" or something.

They often seem to be quite confused. .. Quit sign of conditioning, or belief being pushed over them rather than being coherently constructed by their own mind ..


Big bang, relativity, and all this looks very kabbalist, with  immaterial light, dynamic space, universe expanding from one point, many things remind kabbalist exegese of the genesis.

Just like chemistry, thermodynamics etc looks derivred from alchemy, a bit equivalent of kaballah in Islam.

[BADecker]

Science is more intellectual process than based on sensorial perception, facts etc.

Intellectual process is sensorial perception of what is guessed to be other sensorial perception.

It's not perception of physical objects though

Philo of alexandria make the connection with the mind of god as the logos, as source of truth.

Plato speak of realm of idea similar to this.

Many says the concept of haeven in the bible is the same than those concept of realm of idea of Plato,  and mind of god of philo.

All perception that we know about, is perception at least THROUGH physical objects. The brain and nervous system are physical objects. And even thought that is entirely brain-contained is through the physical brain.

However, I as many others, believe that there is a non-physical aspect of the mind that science does not know about. I believe that we still think, even if there is no brain, and even if the energies that we understand do not exist.

This is something for science of the future to explain. But it may be something that is not explainable. So far, science has only been able to explain a few things of nature clearly... compared with what exists to be explained.

[btcfnatic21]

YES

[Astargath]

Why don't you just admit that you have blind faith in your religion instead of writing this pile of trash ''
I found a lot of grounds upon my beliefs and a lot of indication and signs. There are so many that I do not even try to remember them. They are for me only, you might not understand me. They are deeply private Im shy to share with someone hostile to me. What don't you understand?''
Every single religious person will tell you the same thing, they all have proof of their beliefs yet they can't all be right.

Because I had a conclusion that people are based on four categories. Those who lie unknowigly, those admitting they don't know, those who lie, and those who had rejected the lies and tries to not make another. Truth is a process of throwing away the lies, not discovering something out of numbers. People lie. Its in your blood. You shoud always double check your fellow human. Thats why we have logic and brains.

I admitt I don't know where I don't know. You claim you know how universe was made. You believe scientists know. Scientist use highly sophisticated mathematical models. To know this evidence is to understand it. Are you a professor of mathematics? If no. You lie that you saw the evidence for big bang as it is only mathematical. You are a liar and nothing else. God had said that the liars will be against him. So you just evidenced for me I am on a right path.

Experimental physics is based on the fact that everything on micro scale and macro scale stays the same. Thats the proper science. There is no proof that is otherwise. If that would not be true all of the experimental science would be denied as not true.

The puritans had read their Bible. They knew people are not be trusted. But they wanted to know the truth. Thats how experimental science was made. And the God said it was good. lol. Alleluyah. And they were blessed with inventions and western civilisation.

There are some lockpicks from experimental science, that claims that some constant are constant without any single proof. I would like to remind thats not scientific method to have things unable to be verified, and build mathematical models based on a constant, that is found in one place only. To believe that requires a huge dose of leap of faith. I am fairly sure the atheists do not know how much in science we take for granted that is absolutely unverified, or simply lied.

In other words constants are their idol. And thats their faith. Why? Because people are liars, they will lie if allowed to.

There is absolutely no evidence in the proper science that macro scale level events cannot be imitated in the lab. So. If you say that big bang is evidenced outside of mathematics - that makes you a liar, again.

Noone is claiming to know, outside of kabbalists how the world was done. Big bang is a kabbalistic concept. In my opinion there is no difference between knowing how something is done and demonstrating it.

And thats the criterium of truth. Demonstration. Logic is the tool to show the lie.

You know how something is done? Show me.

P.S Why do you assume some books that claims to be holy are not? Christianity is a culture of scepticism not a blind faith. Muslims and Yews as well. We are all told that people are liars. Its the people that interpret it wrongly and make religions out of the Torah that are liars. God had made no religion. So you lie again. God had only give a message saying hello.

Jesus had that message in a nutshell. "Hello. Im the truth and a way. If you love me (the truth) you will keep my commandments.

See you later. "

The problem with religion is that it replace the God's word and his tradition with human traditions. And thats what people are laughing about. Nothing to laugh from God. Just from silly people that lie.

It does not say that lets say Sikh can not follow those commandments. I think some of them do. Why do say the truth was not shown to Sikh. They say to love one another. Thats almost right there. Do not discourage them.

A lot of talk and still no proof. Just a silly book made by humans, sad.

[IadixDev]

Like all books, including scientific book.

All the proof are there, sad you are so indoctrinated into to your irrational pseudo scientific belief to even see a proof.

[IadixDev]

Science is more intellectual process than based on sensorial perception, facts etc.

Intellectual process is sensorial perception of what is guessed to be other sensorial perception.

It's not perception of physical objects though

Philo of alexandria make the connection with the mind of god as the logos, as source of truth.

Plato speak of realm of idea similar to this.

Many says the concept of haeven in the bible is the same than those concept of realm of idea of Plato,  and mind of god of philo.

All perception that we know about, is perception at least THROUGH physical objects. The brain and nervous system are physical objects. And even thought that is entirely brain-contained is through the physical brain.

However, I as many others, believe that there is a non-physical aspect of the mind that science does not know about. I believe that we still think, even if there is no brain, and even if the energies that we understand do not exist.

This is something for science of the future to explain. But it may be something that is not explainable. So far, science has only been able to explain a few things of nature clearly... compared with what exists to be explained.

Perception through physical object doesnt mean perception of physical objects.

It's same with cpu and programs, even if execution of program is physics/electronics, the validity or correctness of the program is not seen physically.

[Astargath]

You keep saying all the proof is out there but you give me none. You said cows making cows is proof and then that you have proof but it is for yourself. You don't have proof, you were indoctrinated by your parents or family to believe in the bible just like 99% of religious people and you never tried to challenge those beliefs.