Scientific proof that God exists?

[1aguar]

I'm still waiting for someone to direct me to the peer reviewed scientific journal where this is published. If it is not, then it is simply not science. Scientific research is not conducted by basement dwellers at some public forums.

If there were actual science involved it would be published, reviewed the world over, the experiments would be recreated and tested, experts in their fields would try additional experiments. And no, the guy at Bible camp is not an expert in science. Indeed he must reject science to keep the whole house of cards from falling.  

Atheists like RodeoX would rather have us ignore the big questions because the evidence is against them.
By ignoring qualitative observations, atheists reject rationality and mountains of observed evidence (52 salient points);
this ignorant behavior is not intellectual honesty, it is a façade (or "house of cards")!

Although the available veridical NDE evidence does not constitute scientific proof of consciousness surviving bodily death,
it does qualify as very powerful circumstantial and anecdotal evidence, the kind of evidence that is upheld every day in courts of law all around the country.
Whether or not there will ever be scientific evidence for the survival of consciousness
may depend upon science itself and how such phenomenon as NDEs can be quantified.
Using the strict demands of science, we can only conclude as Dr. Raymond Moody does when he had this to say:

"I don't have any idea whether there's life after death or not. I've been a follower of science all of my life, but I also have a Ph.D. in philosophy, and it really seems to me that the question of life after death is not yet ripe for scientific inquiry because it's not formulatable in a way that fits into the scientific method. I also think it's the most important question. If you think of the big questions of existence, this is the biggie."

[the joint]

I'm still waiting for someone to direct me to the peer reviewed scientific journal where this is published. If it is not, then it is simply not science. Scientific research is not conducted by basement dwellers at some public forums.

If there were actual science involved it would be published, reviewed the world over, the experiments would be recreated and tested, experts in their fields would try additional experiments. And no, the guy at Bible camp is not an expert in science. Indeed he must reject science to keep the whole house of cards from falling. 

While peer-reviewed research certainly has its merits (obvious ones), you certainly must recognize the inherent problems with this standard as it means that: 1) virtually nobody with a better idea has a chance at garnering the attention his idea deserves unless he has a degree and the appropriate academic connections; 2) only tentative, rather than radical, progress will be made due to both the need for consensus among like-minded (not necessarily best-mided) people and the threat to the works of others before them who are protective of their own ideas; 3) generally, new ideas will only garner attention if they can be backed by previously established ones (example: the APA rejected a research proposal I submitted on the sole basis that it was novel and therefore I had no one to cite...um, wtf?!); 4) etc.

The peer-review process as it stands is nice and has merits, and simultaneously it's arguably the greatest impediment to progress and knowledge that exists at a societal level.

[QuestionAuthority]

Maybe one of you Christians can settle a debate I'm having with a friend. Does a two headed baby have one soul or two? And does a baby with two bodies connected to one deformed head have one soul or two?

I think they both have one soul but if you chop them in half real quick before they die and they live for a few minutes that's two souls dying. My Christian friend believes neither of them have a soul because they're abominations born from a sinner that had sex with a jackel. Who's right?

[SlickMoTwoToe]

My Christian friend believes neither of them have a soul because they're abominations born from a sinner that had sex with a jackel. Who's right?

Keked... is this a joke or real?

I'm surprised Christians claim to know so much about souls... if I remember correctly the Bible only mentions souls and the afterlife in a very vague way - something about wailing and grinding of teeth, chaff getting burned, be with me in the kingdom of God etc. I once sold a guy's soul for Bitcoin so I'm the real authority on these matters... https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1011225.0

[Kassenzettel]

its better to be quiet on somethings ... but i am sure it exists

[RodeoX]

I'm still waiting for someone to direct me to the peer reviewed scientific journal where this is published. If it is not, then it is simply not science. Scientific research is not conducted by basement dwellers at some public forums.

If there were actual science involved it would be published... 

Atheists like RodeoX would rather have us ignore the big questions because the evidence is against them.

What evidence? Again, I haven't a clue what is being argued.You should write up your findings, prove your conclusions, then let other scientists run there own experiments to prove or disprove your theory.

[klf]

How can you prove something scientifically if it cannot be measured?

[1aguar]

I'm still waiting for someone to direct me to the peer reviewed scientific journal where this is published. If it is not, then it is simply not science. Scientific research is not conducted by basement dwellers at some public forums.

If there were actual science involved it would be published...

Atheists like RodeoX would rather have us ignore the big questions because the evidence is against them.

What evidence? Again, I haven't a clue what is being argued.You should write up your findings, prove your conclusions, then let other scientists run there own experiments to prove or disprove your theory.

OK, here is a summary to get you started:

One can run (further) experiments and investigations, or one can realize that the evidence (52 salient points) already merits a conclusion, and that a discovery is at hand.

Because there already exists a substantial amount of anecdotal evidence supporting veridical perception [during a "Near-Death Experience"], it may only be a matter of time before hard, scientific evidence of an afterlife is found.

The link to the 52 salient points is on this page of the thread, 2 posts before your first reply. I have made a deduction that God exists based on accepting the survival hypothesis which is strongly evidenced by those 52 salient points.

For example, Dr. Stevenson's conclusions have been confirmed in replication studies (#39); anyone can replicate his work. Many other scientific studies are cited. Reincarnation has been called by some to be the greatest unknown scientific discovery today.

According to recent studies, only about 10% of people are conscious shortly before their death. Of this group, 50% to 67% have Death Bed Visions. This universal anomalous phenomena strongly supports the survival hypothesis just like veridical perception in NDE.

Even more importantly: Skeptical arguments against NDEs are not valid (#34-36, and others). NDEs support the reality of rebirth (#38).

It simply will not do to reject qualitative observations (#36). Many lines of evidence unite in supporting the reality of rebirth (#37).

From the recent AWARE study:
One case was validated and timed using auditory stimuli during cardiac arrest... [C]onsciousness and awareness appeared to occur during a three-minute period when there was no heartbeat. This is paradoxical, since the brain typically ceases functioning within 20-30 seconds of the heart stopping and doesn’t resume again until the heart has been restarted. Furthermore, the detailed recollections of visual awareness in this case were consistent with verified events.

“Thus, while it was not possible to absolutely prove the reality or meaning of patients’ experiences and claims of awareness, (due to the very low incidence (2 per cent) of explicit recall of visual awareness or so called OBE’s), it was impossible to disclaim them either and more work is needed in this area. Clearly, the recalled experience surrounding death now merits further genuine investigation without prejudice.”

[1aguar]

My Christian friend believes neither of them have a soul because they're abominations born from a sinner that had sex with a jackel. Who's right?

Keked... is this a joke or real?

It is a joke; QA does not believe in souls, or else he would believe in God.

QA is making harsh judgments against his perceived enemy, but I would ask him: "What have your harsh judgments done for you lately?"

This quote is from Einstein; ask yourself where YOU are with respect to what is being said here:

[QuestionAuthority]

My Christian friend believes neither of them have a soul because they're abominations born from a sinner that had sex with a jackel. Who's right?

Keked... is this a joke or real?

It is a joke; QA does not believe in souls, or else he would believe in God.

QA is making harsh judgments against his perceived enemy, but I would ask him: "What have your harsh judgments done for you lately?"

This quote is from Einstein; ask yourself where YOU are with respect to what is being said here:

No, I don't believe in God or souls. If it's any consolation, I don't believe in ghosts, Santa Clause, Satan, or the Easter Bunny either. The Incredible Hulk and Spider-Man might be real though because those stories are more believable than any version of religious text I've ever read.

You have to be harsh with Christians to wake them up and I do consider them to be the enemy. As long as they continue to exist then stupidity will flourish, war and hatred will rule the planet and perverted monsters will steal the focus away from knowledge and progress.

Sorry, I don't believe in miracles either. Just because something is born tiny doesn't make it a miracle from God. I think baby chicks are cute too. I used to raise them and when they grew into chickens I'd eat them.

I'm not conceited enough to believe that the grand creator of all things in the universe came to my little speck of dust in space and planted me on it. Then had a son that looks like me to show me that God looks like me. Most of all, I'm not stupid enough to believe ancient stories written by cave dellers are a magic recipe to guide me through my modern day life.

[Shinpako09]

I believe that God exists.. But others doesn't believe that God really exists but they beieve Devil exists..ha???

[1aguar]

No, I don't believe in God or souls.

OK, I got it; now, kindly shut up until you can address the evidence that has been posted on the previous page. 

[1aguar]

I'm surprised Christians claim to know so much about souls... if I remember correctly the Bible only mentions souls and the afterlife in a very vague way - something about wailing and grinding of teeth, chaff getting burned, be with me in the kingdom of God etc.

A lot of material relating to reincarnation was removed from the Bible.

You can still find some parts of the Bible that clearly reference rebirth; here is a helpful reference:
http://www.near-death.com/reincarnation/history/bible.html

You can find extensive detail about life and death in the eight-volume Pleiades Connection series of Phoenix Journals (Journals #22 and #31-37); available here:
http://www.phoenixsourcedistributors.com/

[QuestionAuthority]

No, I don't believe in God or souls.

OK, I got it; now, kindly shut up until you can address the evidence that has been posted on the previous page. 

I haven't seen any evidence that God exists but I will debate the existence of Spider-Man. lol



"If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him." ~ François-Marie Arouet, aka-Voltaire

[the joint]

No, I don't believe in God or souls.

OK, I got it; now, kindly shut up until you can address the evidence that has been posted on the previous page.  

I haven't seen any evidence that God exists but I will debate the existence of Spider-Man. lol



"If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him." ~ François-Marie Arouet, aka-Voltaire

Spiderman cannot be equated to a monotheistic god.  It's a false analogy.  Phrased another way, it would be unsound reasoning to suggest that you can dismiss God by extension of the same reasoning by which you dismiss Spiderman.

The simplest reason is this:
- Theoretically, there are both logical and empirical ways in which Spiderman can be verified or falsified.
- Theoreticaly, there is a logical way that God could be verified or falsified.  But, it is theoretically impossible for there to be any empirical means by which God can verified or falsified.

In other words, it's unsound to dismiss God in the same way you dismiss Spiderman, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or Russel's Teapot, or any other thing that would be subject to empirical verification/falsification.

[QuestionAuthority]

No, I don't believe in God or souls.

OK, I got it; now, kindly shut up until you can address the evidence that has been posted on the previous page.  

I haven't seen any evidence that God exists but I will debate the existence of Spider-Man. lol



"If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him." ~ François-Marie Arouet, aka-Voltaire

Spiderman cannot be equated to a monotheistic god.  It's a false analogy.  Phrased another way, it would be unsound reasoning to suggest that you can dismiss God by extension of the same reasoning by which you dismiss Spiderman.

The simplest reason is this:
- Theoretically, there are both logical and empirical ways in which Spiderman can be verified or falsified.
- Theoreticaly, there is a logical way that God could be verified or falsified.  But, it is theoretically impossible for there to be any empirical means by which God can verified or falsified.

In other words, it's unsound to dismiss God in the same way you dismiss Spiderman, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or Russel's Teapot, or any other thing that would be subject to empirical verification/falsification.

But I see them as the same. To me, the Spider-Man series of books and the God series of books are just make believe stories to entertain their intended audiences. Spider-Man appeals to and was written for a contemporary audience. The God stories are a ragtag collection of different writings appealing to Neanderthal cave dwellers. I'm not going to base my life on either one.

[Betwrong]

The thing is nothing can actually get a "Scientific proof".

[Winalunt]

relegion is inversly proportional to intelligence ,
people who  dont think or who are very superstitious will surely fall into this trap.

[1aguar]

To me, the Spider-Man series of books and the God series of books are just make believe stories to entertain their intended audiences.

You made up a story about your "Christian friend" to entertain yourself and distract yourself from the 52 points of evidence I presented in the previous page. You would rather write down a clever fiction than actually discern something true; how convenient!

Reincarnation is considered by some to be the greatest "unknown" scientific discovery of modern times. Please review the scientific evidence which I have provided for your education; a summary of the 52 points is there in my posts on the previous page. There is no point for you to be in this thread if you cannot address the scientific evidence supporting the survival hypothesis. You think the soul is make-believe, but these 52 points of evidence show that you are wrong; I am not the one who is telling made-up stories in this thread.

"How can you make denial of Allah, who made you live again when you died, will make you dead again, and then alive again, until you finally return to him?" - the Koran [2.28]

[1aguar]

relegion is inversly proportional to intelligence ,
people who  dont think or who are very superstitious will surely fall into this trap.

Be that as it may, I am asking atheists to be rational with regards to the evidence; in common parlance this means that one can think clearly and is capable of intelligently assessing new ideas when presented.
Life after death is not a metaphor--it is backed by 52 salient points of evidence.