Scientific proof that God exists?

[the joint]

Hmm.. What to say next?

I bought a present for my then 10 year old daughter, a crystal ball. She said, what's this for daddy? I said, "It is nothing more than a point of focus for that which you already know, but without it, you will never see as clear as you will if you learn to use it"

The next year, I bought her a pack of Tarot card's.. again she ask's, why these dad? I said, "Well, now that you know what the crystal ball is for, you should be able to see the same thing in the card's, but the cards can help focus more than the crystal ball" - "how's that dad?" - "The card's have intentional combinations of colour and curves designed to evoke your subconciousnous, allowing you to enter Samadhi, which is the actual purpose of freemasonry. Freemason's practice this all their life, attempting to create that which is nothing more than a state of trance. This state of trance is required in order to "move to the goal" - read the origional emerald tablet's, for this goal.. This is why it is a requirement of many secret societies, that the aspiring member must learn the emerald tablet of by heart, note, I say tablet, not tablet's.. do not be confused. There are however people born with the ability to instantly induce this state of mind, and this is, if anything, that which they wish to keep from the world. I can only leave it to you to realise why. Maybe your ball or cards will help, but I doubt it, you either can or cant do it, but in time, you will.."

So we're looking for Scientific proof of god are we? Let's attempt to cut to the chase, and assume that there is indeed two other worlds, excluding the one we stand on. We live in this one, would you call this fact? Do you have scientific proof that you have dreamt at ANY time in your life? NO.

Do you have any proof that there are remnant's of your what you'd call 'soul' after death? NO. You cant prove you have one while your alive. Can you prove that the soul is the spirit? NO. And herein is a key.

They say god is everything, he is our light, our life, and when he withdraws his breath from your body, you die. What? You die? By believing this (scientific) fact, you kill any chance you have of being reborn, if this is your desire. Again, herein is a key.

The emerald tablets of Thoth have a most perfect description of an entity that lives in ALL of us, Known as the "dweller" - the all seeing eye. Why do you think this has been used by freemasonry for over 64.000 years? Notice when I ask a question, no-one answer's, unless they are capable of doing so? They cant, or WONT, not because they are correct or incorrect, they WONT, because they know not to. What I mean by this, is this:

I found a pool of water that, when drank, gives you eternal life. But there is only so much of this gold, so to whom should I share my new found wealth with?

If we all knew we could CHOOSE to be reborn, or move on to higher forms of existance by shedding the body as a snake shed's it's skin.. would you? EVERYONE would.

So let's start at the beginning.. The oldest manuscript on earth is the emerald tablet's, not THE emerald tablet, which simply teaches micro/macrocosmus man. In earlier post's I mentioned that in earlier days of my life, i had dreams.. no, visions, of being inside a larger living entity, and most folks probably laughed. Try lookin up, and make me believe you are outside this universe? You cant, for I am right. Yet I was describing a vision of this micro/macrocosmus image. The emerald Tablets, the bible, both mention spirit.. or spirit's. From the 17th century, there was an explosion of books classed as 'magic' books, be that magic, good or evil, is not the point here, the fact is these books exist, and the potential reader is warned not to take these books lightly, for they do indeed give access to potent FORCES, that MAY be described as spirit's. I need go no further re: spirit's for now, but I will say this: People have been practicing these 'act's' for want of a better word, for at least 64.000 years, some civilisations call these spirit's god's, other's, demon's. But it is true, that they are also governed by higher scource's. They have to follow the laws as we do, only human law, as mentioned in the emerald tablet's, runs counter to those COSMIC laws. Quite simply, for now, it is nothing more than magic, the applicant KNOWS the cause and effect, of drawing a stupid picture, looking into a glass ball, or carrying out (masonic/religious) RITUAL's. Magic cannot be called good OR evil, for it is a coin with two side's, one good, one evil. It is the USER who decide's the cause and effect.
This was portrayed in the matrix, where the frenchman seduced the lass with chocolate, and described what I just did. So it's ok to say I'm wrong, but freemasonry, or the church, whatever church, or religion, is correct?

Again, earlier I mentioned the hands of a clock. The large hand is the Moon. The small hand is the Sun. The second hand, is Mercury. And you think you know time? Try naming these hands with the respective god's of your country. All you know is a scientific measurement created by man that does NOT exist anywhere else in nature. But the Sun, the Moon, and Mercury are the elder brothers, and their orbit's are the 'cycles', as are the repetitive event's of life, like the four seasons. That part I believe in, and can be best described as a loop.

BADecker seems to think moses was created before god. I actually know he blundered here, and accept that, but had to jump on him for being such an idiot as to not know the scource of HIS book. You see, The bible is only just over 2000 years old. The folks that believe in this have been conned. They believe the only start of existance is written in the bible, and even go as far as to say that people used to live for thousands of years.. just to make up for the rest of the missing human history of the planet. But there is a scientific fact which allows me to prove that they are wrong. It has been posted throughout this thread, and not one single person chimed in to say, well, what about this?

The masonic god is known as Ja-Baal-On - how many movies adapt this to zeboulon?

Are you ready?

Yahweh, the christian name of god, existed before christianity. Before Moses. Before Jesus. 62.000 years ago in FACT. Created by (jewish)  freemasonry. Christianity is 2000 years old, not the rest of the planet's history. Ja of Ja-Baal-On is short for Yaweh. or yod hay, vau hay, proving Yaweh is jewish, Baal is cananite, (not jewish) and is viewed in the egyptian papyrus of the weighing of the soul by Anubis, (opener of the way) who weighs the soul while THOTH sit's ontop of the scales. See that half bull/crocodile? This is the devourer of souls, who required child sacrifice. The greeks have an almost identical image of the weighing of the heart. Of course, the names of the depicted character's in the greek version will be the greek gods. The point of 'On' - Osirius, is to remove the O. You now have Sirius. The short map I gave in earlier posts is nothing compared to the truth I know of. I Asked a question last night: Lets pretend for a moment that the sky above reflects that which is below, in this case, show me Earth above, without pointing to the ball you stand on..

A decent scientist may not be able to find proof of a particular thing, so then may ask those who have had similar problems, but overcome them. Those he asked, wrote their evidence in a book, then died before the decent scientist. The decent scientist reference's the deceased's writing's, considering them as proof. Well, for at least since they started 'praying' well before the pyramids were ever designed, they have acted out certain ritual's, with scientifically proven result's. Over and over again. So I say, if you want proof of god, start practising some of these magic 'spell's' for want of a better word, see if you get any results.. I personnaly prefer reading agrippa, due to the books being older than say john dee, but would never dream of practising - the art of magic.

Of couse God exists, only keep in mind, Jaweh is only ONE god, There are other's, like BAAL, the real question is, is who is subordinate to who?

They are ALL subordinate to the one no-one has or can ever name, for, as previously mentioned, THEN he has a life span. And hence can die.

Basically the only relevant consideration I have to offer after reading all of this is a follow-up to the beginning of this statement that you make:

So we're looking for Scientific proof of god are we? Let's attempt to cut to the chase...

Yes, let's cut to the chase.  I am *not* looking for scientific proof of god because it is *logically impossible* for there to be any based upon the incontrovertible statements I made in my previous post.

Beyond that, I have no words.  Sorry.

Then kindly remove yourself to the respective thread dealing with your empirical assumptions (bullshit), since this thread is clearly not for you or your questions, sorry..

Who are you responding to?  Me?  Lol you have no idea what I'm saying, do you?

Let me ask you this:  What do you think I'm saying?  Please summarize what it is you think I am saying.  This should be an easy task for you since you are saying that it's "bullshit."

My guess is that you have no idea what point it is I'm trying to make.  Please prove me wrong.

[BADecker]

Then kindly remove yourself to the respective thread dealing with your empirical assumptions (bullshit), since this thread is clearly not for you or your questions, sorry..

That's exactly the kind of thing I would have said to you if I weren't hoping for your salvation. It's amazing how you dabble in non-science and then call it science.

[RodeoX]

For me, as long as the evidence for God is identical to the evidence for unicorns, mermaids, and leprechauns I see no reason to believe it. It may just be a difference in how we view the world. I don't believe in things on faith. It takes evidence to convince me. I also don't start with an assumption that must be true no matter what the facts say. An assumption like "My God simply has to exist".

This sort of thinking is called superstition. Facts challenge superstitions and force a decision. One can examine the facts and follow them to the truth, even if you don't like it. Or you can double down and ignore facts. Typically a threatened person will first attack the facts. When that becomes impossible the attacks switch to science itself. Weird considering we use science to solve almost all our problems today. No other philosophy has yielded so much fruit or changed the world more, yet for many recognizing Gods absence in the workings of the universe means considering that their entire concept of reality could be false.  Not everyone can be that honest with themselves.

[arnab]

What do you think?
Please share your opinion about this article.


101 Proofs For God

A growing list of common sense Proofs for God.

Proof for God, #65 Mitochondrial Eve and Y-Chromosome Adam

 Genetic scientists seem to be in general agreement that we are all descendants of one woman and one man. This research was fairly recent, starting about 1978. They, of course, do not believe in the creation story of Adam and Eve in the Bible, but their conclusions are getting closer and closer.

In case you have not heard about this, it makes very interesting reading. But I think it raises a number of profound challenges to the Theory of Evolution.

The scientists base the above conclusions on the known facts of human reproduction, specifically on properties of the sperm and egg. .....
Full article read here: http://101proofsforgod.blogspot.com/2014/07/65-mitochondial-eve-and-y-chromosome.html

i just hate those peoples who misuse gods name

[Decksperiment]

Hmm.. What to say next?

I bought a present for my then 10 year old daughter, a crystal ball. She said, what's this for daddy? I said, "It is nothing more than a point of focus for that which you already know, but without it, you will never see as clear as you will if you learn to use it"

The next year, I bought her a pack of Tarot card's.. again she ask's, why these dad? I said, "Well, now that you know what the crystal ball is for, you should be able to see the same thing in the card's, but the cards can help focus more than the crystal ball" - "how's that dad?" - "The card's have intentional combinations of colour and curves designed to evoke your subconciousnous, allowing you to enter Samadhi, which is the actual purpose of freemasonry. Freemason's practice this all their life, attempting to create that which is nothing more than a state of trance. This state of trance is required in order to "move to the goal" - read the origional emerald tablet's, for this goal.. This is why it is a requirement of many secret societies, that the aspiring member must learn the emerald tablet of by heart, note, I say tablet, not tablet's.. do not be confused. There are however people born with the ability to instantly induce this state of mind, and this is, if anything, that which they wish to keep from the world. I can only leave it to you to realise why. Maybe your ball or cards will help, but I doubt it, you either can or cant do it, but in time, you will.."

So we're looking for Scientific proof of god are we? Let's attempt to cut to the chase, and assume that there is indeed two other worlds, excluding the one we stand on. We live in this one, would you call this fact? Do you have scientific proof that you have dreamt at ANY time in your life? NO.

Do you have any proof that there are remnant's of your what you'd call 'soul' after death? NO. You cant prove you have one while your alive. Can you prove that the soul is the spirit? NO. And herein is a key.

They say god is everything, he is our light, our life, and when he withdraws his breath from your body, you die. What? You die? By believing this (scientific) fact, you kill any chance you have of being reborn, if this is your desire. Again, herein is a key.

The emerald tablets of Thoth have a most perfect description of an entity that lives in ALL of us, Known as the "dweller" - the all seeing eye. Why do you think this has been used by freemasonry for over 64.000 years? Notice when I ask a question, no-one answer's, unless they are capable of doing so? They cant, or WONT, not because they are correct or incorrect, they WONT, because they know not to. What I mean by this, is this:

I found a pool of water that, when drank, gives you eternal life. But there is only so much of this gold, so to whom should I share my new found wealth with?

If we all knew we could CHOOSE to be reborn, or move on to higher forms of existance by shedding the body as a snake shed's it's skin.. would you? EVERYONE would.

So let's start at the beginning.. The oldest manuscript on earth is the emerald tablet's, not THE emerald tablet, which simply teaches micro/macrocosmus man. In earlier post's I mentioned that in earlier days of my life, i had dreams.. no, visions, of being inside a larger living entity, and most folks probably laughed. Try lookin up, and make me believe you are outside this universe? You cant, for I am right. Yet I was describing a vision of this micro/macrocosmus image. The emerald Tablets, the bible, both mention spirit.. or spirit's. From the 17th century, there was an explosion of books classed as 'magic' books, be that magic, good or evil, is not the point here, the fact is these books exist, and the potential reader is warned not to take these books lightly, for they do indeed give access to potent FORCES, that MAY be described as spirit's. I need go no further re: spirit's for now, but I will say this: People have been practicing these 'act's' for want of a better word, for at least 64.000 years, some civilisations call these spirit's god's, other's, demon's. But it is true, that they are also governed by higher scource's. They have to follow the laws as we do, only human law, as mentioned in the emerald tablet's, runs counter to those COSMIC laws. Quite simply, for now, it is nothing more than magic, the applicant KNOWS the cause and effect, of drawing a stupid picture, looking into a glass ball, or carrying out (masonic/religious) RITUAL's. Magic cannot be called good OR evil, for it is a coin with two side's, one good, one evil. It is the USER who decide's the cause and effect.
This was portrayed in the matrix, where the frenchman seduced the lass with chocolate, and described what I just did. So it's ok to say I'm wrong, but freemasonry, or the church, whatever church, or religion, is correct?

Again, earlier I mentioned the hands of a clock. The large hand is the Moon. The small hand is the Sun. The second hand, is Mercury. And you think you know time? Try naming these hands with the respective god's of your country. All you know is a scientific measurement created by man that does NOT exist anywhere else in nature. But the Sun, the Moon, and Mercury are the elder brothers, and their orbit's are the 'cycles', as are the repetitive event's of life, like the four seasons. That part I believe in, and can be best described as a loop.

BADecker seems to think moses was created before god. I actually know he blundered here, and accept that, but had to jump on him for being such an idiot as to not know the scource of HIS book. You see, The bible is only just over 2000 years old. The folks that believe in this have been conned. They believe the only start of existance is written in the bible, and even go as far as to say that people used to live for thousands of years.. just to make up for the rest of the missing human history of the planet. But there is a scientific fact which allows me to prove that they are wrong. It has been posted throughout this thread, and not one single person chimed in to say, well, what about this?

The masonic god is known as Ja-Baal-On - how many movies adapt this to zeboulon?

Are you ready?

Yahweh, the christian name of god, existed before christianity. Before Moses. Before Jesus. 62.000 years ago in FACT. Created by (jewish)  freemasonry. Christianity is 2000 years old, not the rest of the planet's history. Ja of Ja-Baal-On is short for Yaweh. or yod hay, vau hay, proving Yaweh is jewish, Baal is cananite, (not jewish) and is viewed in the egyptian papyrus of the weighing of the soul by Anubis, (opener of the way) who weighs the soul while THOTH sit's ontop of the scales. See that half bull/crocodile? This is the devourer of souls, who required child sacrifice. The greeks have an almost identical image of the weighing of the heart. Of course, the names of the depicted character's in the greek version will be the greek gods. The point of 'On' - Osirius, is to remove the O. You now have Sirius. The short map I gave in earlier posts is nothing compared to the truth I know of. I Asked a question last night: Lets pretend for a moment that the sky above reflects that which is below, in this case, show me Earth above, without pointing to the ball you stand on..

A decent scientist may not be able to find proof of a particular thing, so then may ask those who have had similar problems, but overcome them. Those he asked, wrote their evidence in a book, then died before the decent scientist. The decent scientist reference's the deceased's writing's, considering them as proof. Well, for at least since they started 'praying' well before the pyramids were ever designed, they have acted out certain ritual's, with scientifically proven result's. Over and over again. So I say, if you want proof of god, start practising some of these magic 'spell's' for want of a better word, see if you get any results.. I personnaly prefer reading agrippa, due to the books being older than say john dee, but would never dream of practising - the art of magic.

Of couse God exists, only keep in mind, Jaweh is only ONE god, There are other's, like BAAL, the real question is, is who is subordinate to who?

They are ALL subordinate to the one no-one has or can ever name, for, as previously mentioned, THEN he has a life span. And hence can die.

Basically the only relevant consideration I have to offer after reading all of this is a follow-up to the beginning of this statement that you make:

So we're looking for Scientific proof of god are we? Let's attempt to cut to the chase...

Yes, let's cut to the chase.  I am *not* looking for scientific proof of god because it is *logically impossible* for there to be any based upon the incontrovertible statements I made in my previous post.

Beyond that, I have no words.  Sorry.

Then kindly remove yourself to the respective thread dealing with your empirical assumptions (bullshit), since this thread is clearly not for you or your questions, sorry..

Who are you responding to?  Me?  Lol you have no idea what I'm saying, do you?

Let me ask you this:  What do you think I'm saying?  Please summarize what it is you think I am saying.  This should be an easy task for you since you are saying that it's "bullshit."

My guess is that you have no idea what point it is I'm trying to make.  Please prove me wrong.

I'm not fuckin intersted in your empirical bullshit, and dont care for it, due to it being the most useless waste of internet you have ever concieved, go produce something from it, (what you cant?) and stop FORCING it on those who have already said are NOT INTERESTED.

[BADecker]

The only reason the scientific method works is by first relying upon assumptions or premises which are independent of experience, i.e. non-empirical.  It is axiomatic via the scientific method that, by definition, it cannot explore the non-empirical, but only the empirical...which is exactly what I've been saying.

Actually, the very foundational reason that the scientific method can work is that God has stabilized the universe in such a way that things that work have understandable reason, pattern and repetition-of-process to them. If it weren't for this, the scientific method would be totally useless except when being used to prove itself to be totally useless.

...

Hmm.

"...understandable reason, pattern and repitition-of-process..." is what we call logic and that which is logical.  You're saying the same thing as I am, but you're just effectively saying that logic = God which is just completely unnecessary.

How does necessity play in? Obviously it is unnecessary to say anything. But since logic was first developed by God, and since the scientific method works by logic, why not work with the Source to find out how to best use logic?

[Decksperiment]

Then kindly remove yourself to the respective thread dealing with your empirical assumptions (bullshit), since this thread is clearly not for you or your questions, sorry..

That's exactly the kind of thing I would have said to you if I weren't hoping for your salvation. It's amazing how you dabble in non-science and then call it science.

You are a christian worshipping a jewish diety, have a nice day.. and watch your country crumble because of this FACT. You cannot be saved, because you are not of the chosen people of your book. You are NOT a jew.

Clamped.

[BADecker]

For me, as long as the evidence for God is identical to the evidence for unicorns, mermaids, and leprechauns I see no reason to believe it. It may just be a difference in how we view the world. I don't believe in things on faith. It takes evidence to convince me. I also don't start with an assumption that must be true no matter what the facts say. An assumption like "My God simply has to exist".

This sort of thinking is called superstition. Facts challenge superstitions and force a decision. One can examine the facts and follow them to the truth, even if you don't like it. Or you can double down and ignore facts. Typically a threatened person will first attack the facts. When that becomes impossible the attacks switch to science itself. Weird considering we use science to solve almost all our problems today. No other philosophy has yielded so much fruit or changed the world more, yet for many recognizing Gods absence in the workings of the universe means considering that their entire concept of reality could be false.  Not everyone can be that honest with themselves.

The word "evidence" comes from its base "evident."

If a proponent of one thought has one piece of evidence, and the proponent of the opposite thought has a thousand pieces of evidence, which one would seem to be the more correct thought?

Intentionally ignoring evidence isn't the same thing as there being no evidence.

The extreme numbers of evidences for God are found in nature all around us. They are found in the evidence that nature is a machine, that machines have makers, and that the machines of nature are way beyond us. These things show that God exists.

There are more ways to make the evidences more evident, but these are the only ones that are really needed. The only other possibility regarding scientific proof for God is ignorance. That's it. It is self-evident.

[Decksperiment]

For me, as long as the evidence for God is identical to the evidence for unicorns, mermaids, and leprechauns I see no reason to believe it. It may just be a difference in how we view the world. I don't believe in things on faith. It takes evidence to convince me. I also don't start with an assumption that must be true no matter what the facts say. An assumption like "My God simply has to exist".

This sort of thinking is called superstition. Facts challenge superstitions and force a decision. One can examine the facts and follow them to the truth, even if you don't like it. Or you can double down and ignore facts. Typically a threatened person will first attack the facts. When that becomes impossible the attacks switch to science itself. Weird considering we use science to solve almost all our problems today. No other philosophy has yielded so much fruit or changed the world more, yet for many recognizing Gods absence in the workings of the universe means considering that their entire concept of reality could be false.  Not everyone can be that honest with themselves.

The word "evidence" comes from its base "evident."

If a proponent of one thought has one piece of evidence, and the proponent of the opposite thought has a thousand pieces of evidence, which one would seem to be the more correct thought?

Intentionally ignoring evidence isn't the same thing as there being no evidence.

The extreme numbers of evidences for God are found in nature all around us. They are found in the evidence that nature is a machine, that machines have makers, and that the machines of nature are way beyond us. These things show that God exists.

There are more ways to make the evidences more evident, but these are the only ones that are really needed. The only other possibility regarding scientific proof for God is ignorance. That's it. It is self-evident.

Kindly produce 1 peice of evidence you have personally found in nature that PROVES god exists then?

[BADecker]

I'm not fuckin intersted in your empirical bullshit, and dont care for it, due to it being the most useless waste of internet you have ever concieved, go produce something from it, (what you cant?) and stop FORCING it on those who have already said are NOT INTERESTED.

Now, now, relax... before you bust a blood vessel.

I understand how difficult it is to accept logic that cuts the very base out from under your thinking.

But why not rather embrace the truth and be saved, rather than trying to find some way to logically remove the truth from existence. You can't do that. It simply can't be done. You will only wind up harming yourself.

[Decksperiment]

I'm not fuckin intersted in your empirical bullshit, and dont care for it, due to it being the most useless waste of internet you have ever concieved, go produce something from it, (what you cant?) and stop FORCING it on those who have already said are NOT INTERESTED.

Now, now, relax... before you bust a blood vessel.

I understand how difficult it is to accept logic that cuts the very base out from under your thinking.

But why not rather embrace the truth and be saved, rather than trying to find some way to logically remove the truth from existence. You can't do that. It simply can't be done. You will only wind up harming yourself.

I have posted the truth your diety is yod hay vau hay, I have proven using the INRI formula that Yahweh, YOUR diety, is MASONIC, created by the JEWS, and not only that, but there are more than one god, so please, prove Yahweh created logic.

Clamped again.

[RodeoX]

For me, as long as ...

The word "evidence" comes from its base "evident."

If a proponent of one thought has one piece of evidence, and the proponent of the opposite thought has a thousand pieces of evidence, which one would seem to be the more correct thought?

Intentionally ignoring evidence isn't the same thing as there being no evidence.

The extreme numbers of evidences for God are found in nature all around us. They are found in the evidence that nature is a machine, that machines have makers, and that the machines of nature are way beyond us. These things show that God exists.

There are more ways to make the evidences more evident, but these are the only ones that are really needed. The only other possibility regarding scientific proof for God is ignorance. That's it. It is self-evident.

But it is in no way evident to me? There is no logical inference in that argument. Because nature is a machine? Who says that and what about our ability to make machines, are we all Gods? As stated before in this thread if you have any logical evidence you can publish it and have it reviewed. That's how science works, you must show the evidence. Biologists have completed thousands and thousands of experiment to demonstrate the logic of evolution. But not one single experiment has ever demonstrated a contradiction.  

[Decksperiment]

He's away checking his god's date of birth, he said he'd be back, logically...

[BADecker]

For me, as long as the evidence for God is identical to the evidence for unicorns, mermaids, and leprechauns I see no reason to believe it. It may just be a difference in how we view the world. I don't believe in things on faith. It takes evidence to convince me. I also don't start with an assumption that must be true no matter what the facts say. An assumption like "My God simply has to exist".

This sort of thinking is called superstition. Facts challenge superstitions and force a decision. One can examine the facts and follow them to the truth, even if you don't like it. Or you can double down and ignore facts. Typically a threatened person will first attack the facts. When that becomes impossible the attacks switch to science itself. Weird considering we use science to solve almost all our problems today. No other philosophy has yielded so much fruit or changed the world more, yet for many recognizing Gods absence in the workings of the universe means considering that their entire concept of reality could be false.  Not everyone can be that honest with themselves.

The word "evidence" comes from its base "evident."

If a proponent of one thought has one piece of evidence, and the proponent of the opposite thought has a thousand pieces of evidence, which one would seem to be the more correct thought?

Intentionally ignoring evidence isn't the same thing as there being no evidence.

The extreme numbers of evidences for God are found in nature all around us. They are found in the evidence that nature is a machine, that machines have makers, and that the machines of nature are way beyond us. These things show that God exists.

There are more ways to make the evidences more evident, but these are the only ones that are really needed. The only other possibility regarding scientific proof for God is ignorance. That's it. It is self-evident.

Kindly produce 1 peice of evidence you have personally found in nature that PROVES god exists then?

That's the point. Usually one piece of evidence isn't quite enough to prove anything. Even in the courts, if you are challenged regarding your statements, at least one witness is needed, and there has to be additional evidence that can't easily be refuted.

As I said above, the whole of nature is a multitude of evidences for God, way more evidences than can be counted. But if you need another angle, consider that in the reality of nature, everything operates by cause and effect. So, what caused the causes, that caused the causes, that caused the causes, that caused the causes, that caused the causes, and so on, right down to today? The longer you extend the timeline, the greater you are suggesting that God is.

Look at billiards, the game of pool. If someone hits a ball, that hits another ball, that hits another ball, that hits another ball, that hits another ball, that knocks a final ball into a pocket, that player is doing extremely well. So, the further back you extend time, the more complicated it would be for the Great First Cause to have kick-started everything into the positions that they hold today. What you are doing is you are actually declaring the greatness of God to be way beyond what I have suggested with my little 6,000 years.

[Decksperiment]

Where's your Proof GODammit?

Allow me:

In Exodus, thanks to Rameses threat to the children, god takes the breath from x amount of the children of egypt.. yeah, you love your god doncha?

Reeks of BAAL, who requires child sacrifice..

But then, thanks to freemasonry, Yahweh, BAAL, and ON, are not two, but three in the same no?

A jewish creation designed to prevent YOU reaching the salvation you seek. You'll deny BAAL, but not YAHWEH?

[BADecker]

For me, as long as ...

The word "evidence" comes from its base "evident."

If a proponent of one thought has one piece of evidence, and the proponent of the opposite thought has a thousand pieces of evidence, which one would seem to be the more correct thought?

Intentionally ignoring evidence isn't the same thing as there being no evidence.

The extreme numbers of evidences for God are found in nature all around us. They are found in the evidence that nature is a machine, that machines have makers, and that the machines of nature are way beyond us. These things show that God exists.

There are more ways to make the evidences more evident, but these are the only ones that are really needed. The only other possibility regarding scientific proof for God is ignorance. That's it. It is self-evident.

But it is in no way evident to me? There is no logical inference in that argument. Because nature is a machine? Who says that and what about our ability to make machines, are we all Gods? As stated before in this thread if you have any logical evidence you can publish it and have it reviewed. That's how science works, you must show the evidence. Biologists have completed thousands and thousands of experiment to demonstrate the logic of evolution. But not one single experiment has ever demonstrated a contradiction.  

Yes, we are gods. Even the God of the Bible says that.

Watch the Youtube videos that show cellular action. Cells are machines in every sense of the word.

Further, all - 100% - of the machines that we make are based on the machine action that we see in the universe around us. It doesn't make sense for man to take his machines from the examples of machines in nature, and then turn around and say that nature doesn't have machines, isn't built out of machinery, isn't a machine itself.

[BADecker]

Where's your Proof GODammit?

Allow me:

In Exodus, thanks to Rameses threat to the children, god takes the breath from x amount of the children of egypt.. yeah, you love your god doncha?

Reeks of BAAL, who requires child sacrifice..

It is beginning to appear that you wouldn't be able to recognize proof if it jumped right out and bit you in the forehead.

Actually, such a thing isn't so amazing. In fact, it is very common among people. That's why God says that you have to take Him on faith, at least in part. You don't recognize much of evidence or proof.

[Decksperiment]

BADecker.. why do you always ignore damn fine questions relating to your diety of choice? You'll quite happily post links to plenty masonic writing's, but not admit anything I have proven to you, despite it being, believe it or not, in your favour? Yet you think you can insult me?

Assume for one second I am god's newest messenger.. the old gods are dead. Your country has less than 1000 days left.. Thank you for the power I needed to make this a fact.. you sit insulting god's messenger'(s) with your out of date, and now clearly proven to be jewish, masonic, I'll say cabalistic, book. YAHWEH IS BAAL IS ON. the THREE mighty messengers..

Wanna buy a gun, so you can put those homeless out of their misery quicker without having to be nice, and more importantly, honest, with your fellow man?

Yeah, you'll buy the gun, even encourage folks like me to buy one, but you wont admit, your a jew lover?

[Decksperiment]

Where's your Proof GODammit?

Allow me:

In Exodus, thanks to Rameses threat to the children, god takes the breath from x amount of the children of egypt.. yeah, you love your god doncha?

Reeks of BAAL, who requires child sacrifice..

It is beginning to appear that you wouldn't be able to recognize proof if it jumped right out and bit you in the forehead.

Actually, such a thing isn't so amazing. In fact, it is very common among people. That's why God says that you have to take Him on faith, at least in part. You don't recognize much of evidence or proof.

You are really loosing the plot.. I guess the realisation, that everything you have typed re: the bible, took place in the promised land, or surrounding districts. Yahweh was created so long before ANY biblical account, as is PROVEN by freemasonry holding rituals in the pyramids, unless you know of any other diety's name they may have used at the time? Are you claiming freemasonry is lying about their diety's name?

[RodeoX]

That's the point. Usually one piece of evidence isn't quite enough to prove anything. Even in the courts, if you are challenged regarding your statements, at least one witness is needed, and there has to be additional evidence that can't easily be refuted.

As I said above, the whole of nature is a multitude of evidences for God, way more evidences than can be counted. But if you need another angle, consider that in the reality of nature, everything operates by cause and effect. So, what caused the causes, that caused the causes, that caused the causes, that caused the causes, that caused the causes, and so on, right down to today? The longer you extend the timeline, the greater you are suggesting that God is.

Look at billiards, the game of pool. If someone hits a ball, that hits another ball, that hits another ball, that hits another ball, that hits another ball, that knocks a final ball into a pocket, that player is doing extremely well. So, the further back you extend time, the more complicated it would be for the Great First Cause to have kick-started everything into the positions that they hold today. What you are doing is you are actually declaring the greatness of God to be way beyond what I have suggested with my little 6,000 years.

But that is not a convincing argument. Even the idea of cause and effect is known to be incorrect. It works at scales we experience but at the sub-atomic scale cause and effect breaks down and effect can follow cause. Following the same logic one could ask "who caused God then?".
And what about things we absolutely can prove without a doubt? Like the fact that the Earth is billions of years old, not 6,000?
I just don't buy it. Despite the fact that most people who have ever lived believed in one God or another.