Scientific proof that God exists?

[BADecker]

Well, this god or gods have never made their existence known to me to my best knowledge and all i have as to their supposed existence is from others, which on closer scrutiny have it from still others and so on. So, it all sounds like hearsay to me.

Which leads me to believe that either there are no gods at all or there possibly is some god or gods or super force above it all only it has never had any reason or will or whatever to make its existence known to me or anybody else. Ever.

If God walked up to you like a human does, why would anyone think that He was God?

The machinery of nature is machines. The nature machine is so much more complex than people, that scientists haven't been able to give us 200 years of life yet. Machines have makers. Who made the nature machine?

[1713569500]

1713569500

[1713569500]

1713569500

[1713569500]

1713569500

[sirazimuth]

Did you realize on your own that animals don't invent Gods or you needed help from your cult? I can enumerate you a shitload of things plants and animals do not do, you would be surprised to find out there are differences between us and other living beings. But bravo, your discovery that animals and plants do not praise gods will change the world as we know it, you little genius. On a more serious manner, I know you cultists see yourselves as gods walking the earth, I already said that about you. That's what makes you a fanatic in the first place. On the other hand, no, I do not see myself as a God among nature because I am aware of the reality of things. We reach a conclusion however: you said nature is beyond what mankind can think, therefore God exists. That is false, what is beyond what mankind can think is called supernatural, you should know that. And no, supernatural does not necessarily mean God. It means supernatural and you need evidence to prove that a certain supernatural is a God. That is the flaw in your mindset. That's the 'apology'. Not being able to understand something and immediately calling it God, because you've been taught since birth about God, you grew up in a culture that praises God, your brain is in big difficulty when put to work on rational, scientific things, without implying that a God exists. You are a victim of religion. Do you know what the real issue for most of the islamic immigrants is? They suddenly realized the possibility of the non existence of an after life. That kind of makes them want to live this life, not end it and risk it. The same that gave birth to Gods will also be able to 'kill' them as a 'rule' and keep them as a myth. And I am talking about mankind. It won't happen too soon because, as we can see, religious people know how to 'go with the wave' in order to keep the myth alive. That is why instead of simple, classical christians you now have deists, theists, creationists, and many other ramifications. They don't have an identity anymore because they need to adapt the lie to the modern world and its discoveries. If it was true in the first place, it would have stayed the same.

I am a little curious. Is there any scientific proof for or against the existence of God in all your religious blabber up there? No? I didn't think so.



If you are new to the forum, you can see the scientific proof that God exists here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380.

I am a little curious of how and why did you ever thought of God, my dear imbecile hypocrite. Did you climb out of your mothers womb and yelled God? Were you in kindergarten and suddenly a thought sprung in your mind 'This chaos must have been created, I'll call the creator God'. Or maybe you were baptized, taken to church, taught about the religion in  which you grew, the very same religion that taught you in the first place that a God exists? You keep bitching about the lack of scientific proof or disproof in my comments, as if you would have any scientific material in any shit that you post. Not only a hypocrite, but also a liar, by claiming to be a physicist and a biologist. My question for you is why do you deny and run away from the religion that has taught you about God? And more important, in what God do you believe?

You may know that by ignoring these two questions it will only make a liar out of you, a fraud, a guy who writes here only to sustain his activity on the forum. That, or a really imbecile hypocrite who knows that he would have no chance to make people believe in God by the very same thing that gave birth to a God, religion, and tries what many apologists try: stick with the science, that works for the youth today. You sick fuck. Answer thosse two questions and it will get more scientific than you would ever hope for.

Indoctrination is so strong that most people do not even know why they believe in the nonsense they believe.

They just believe no matter if it is true or even remotely makes sense.

I think the fear of punishment is what keeps their belief alive.

Ask them where is God? And watch them internalize their incoherent world view.

Sometimes BADecker says God exist outside of this universe, sometimes he says he is hiding in people's souls. Lol...

The real answer is they don't know where God is or what he is.  All made up concept, refined as required.

Well said. The fear of punishment is what kept them in there, a form of legal and spiritual slavery. To know that you are owned and if you do not obey, the big one is going to be really angry about it. I also think there is one more fear keeping them inside, a hypocrite one: the fear of being wrong, the fear that your whole life was a lie. It is a flawed thought that one can not change later. Some say that religion is built inside the human, that it is something that we feel the need for. Well, that does not make it good. We also had and still have a killing instinct inside of us, it doesn't mean we should follow it.

This is almost the complete reason that Horacewoodwood continually resorts to religion rather than science in a science topic. Of course, there is his troll pay, as well.

Because of this, science is a religion for him.

You still have not answered two simple questions that I have asked and all you do is try to find a scapegoat. And it is all so simple, you can not ever answer those questions. Because your linage is religion, your God is your religion. You won't ever deny it, you little slave, because you are not allowed to do so. What you will always do is try to make it look like I am off topic. The truth,the one that you try to hide, is that it is impossible for any human being that believes in God to scientifically prove God without going through religion. That is because religion is the one that brought up a God story in the first place. Denying religion as a believer is the same as denying cause and effect, the principle that you base your proof on. So, there either is a God, or there isn't. And if there is one, it is one that belongs to a religion, because that is how Gods appeared, it is a fact. If you deny religion, you deny God. If you don't, you will have to answer some questions. This is a yes or no, not a maybe, unless God is a maybe for you and we get to the point of 'why the fuck do we even bother'. Until you answer you are nothing but a fraud, a cultist, a fanatic, a retard, an apologist, etc. All of these because you have no clear pathway regarding your position about God.

Are you religion? No. You are fact. The evidence and proof is in the fact that you are posting here. Delete all your posts and your account, and it might be difficult proving that you are fact.

However, believing the things you say, especially if their is no way to prove them, is religion.

Somebody might read your blabber. But if you don't do a little like a scientist, and split it up so that people can see what you are talking about, who cares?

The proof for God has been shown. Your religious attitude is being shown every time you blabber. Perhaps you can get into science sometime. But if you don't, who cares?

BADecker does not address the question as usual and since he has no rebuttal, he just simply claims Horace's
perfectly understandable logical posts are "babble".
that's ironic because badecker has taken the art of posting babble
to a whole new level . just read this thread.  its 95 per cent badecker babbling biblical bollocks bullshit beliefs interspersed with
rational posts calling him out at every turn.

[qwik2learn]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty_Cases_Suggestive_of_Reincarnation

20 cases where the physical evidence is very hard to explain with the normal assumptions about death.

You would be surprised that I know of this book and also read a big part. The stories have been long discussed and there have been some main issues:

1. All of the cases are placed in India, a place where people believe in reincarnation. Most of the stories are quite uncommon, stories that could have been heard around. Children or parents living in an area where reincarnation is a belief could be looking for motives of making it seem real for them.

2. Even if the stories are right, they indeed are suggestive. We are talking about reincarnation, that is a huge discovery, you can not jump to a conclusion so fast. You need a bit more than this. So yes, I do not say it is a lie, it could very well be true, but we can not jump to a conclusion from 20 cases. However, even if one day we discover that reincarnation is true, that does not automatically lead to the proof of a God. Not by far.

I can not rebut the psychological part of this issue, I did not study psychology so my rebuttal is somehow skeptical concerning issue no 1 but I can not possibly say it could not be true, that is what I've said in issue no 2.

Yes I am surprised that you read it, good for you, I do think you need to read more from Dr. Ian Stevenson and those who follow up on his work. Reincarnation and Biology is a real topic and Dr. Stevenon wrote the book on that, the physical evidence indicates more than stories, cultural influence is not sufficient to explain all cases of the reincarnation type such as European cases. The next 40 points of evidence from AECES contains other historic events in parapsychological research, there is a lot of physical and documentary evidence in those cases too. The fact that these events are historical is confirmed by replication studies. These are more than stories, they are historically recorded events and can be reconstructed by a skilled researcher. Other intriguing examples of evidence comes from mediumship which has produced voluminous records of the encounter with the discarnate being, these records can be analyzed just like the spirit contact cases sumarized by AECES. I present to you the most convenient means of establishing the existence of mind existing without a body, so far I have 60 points and you have 1 invalid argument based on the falsified theory of cultural origin.

[qwik2learn]

http://www.csicop.org/si/show/field_guide_to_critical_thinking
Apply the Field Guide to Critical Thinking . Only for use by real skeptics.

[Horacewoodwood]

Did you realize on your own that animals don't invent Gods or you needed help from your cult? I can enumerate you a shitload of things plants and animals do not do, you would be surprised to find out there are differences between us and other living beings. But bravo, your discovery that animals and plants do not praise gods will change the world as we know it, you little genius. On a more serious manner, I know you cultists see yourselves as gods walking the earth, I already said that about you. That's what makes you a fanatic in the first place. On the other hand, no, I do not see myself as a God among nature because I am aware of the reality of things. We reach a conclusion however: you said nature is beyond what mankind can think, therefore God exists. That is false, what is beyond what mankind can think is called supernatural, you should know that. And no, supernatural does not necessarily mean God. It means supernatural and you need evidence to prove that a certain supernatural is a God. That is the flaw in your mindset. That's the 'apology'. Not being able to understand something and immediately calling it God, because you've been taught since birth about God, you grew up in a culture that praises God, your brain is in big difficulty when put to work on rational, scientific things, without implying that a God exists. You are a victim of religion. Do you know what the real issue for most of the islamic immigrants is? They suddenly realized the possibility of the non existence of an after life. That kind of makes them want to live this life, not end it and risk it. The same that gave birth to Gods will also be able to 'kill' them as a 'rule' and keep them as a myth. And I am talking about mankind. It won't happen too soon because, as we can see, religious people know how to 'go with the wave' in order to keep the myth alive. That is why instead of simple, classical christians you now have deists, theists, creationists, and many other ramifications. They don't have an identity anymore because they need to adapt the lie to the modern world and its discoveries. If it was true in the first place, it would have stayed the same.

I am a little curious. Is there any scientific proof for or against the existence of God in all your religious blabber up there? No? I didn't think so.



If you are new to the forum, you can see the scientific proof that God exists here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380.

I am a little curious of how and why did you ever thought of God, my dear imbecile hypocrite. Did you climb out of your mothers womb and yelled God? Were you in kindergarten and suddenly a thought sprung in your mind 'This chaos must have been created, I'll call the creator God'. Or maybe you were baptized, taken to church, taught about the religion in  which you grew, the very same religion that taught you in the first place that a God exists? You keep bitching about the lack of scientific proof or disproof in my comments, as if you would have any scientific material in any shit that you post. Not only a hypocrite, but also a liar, by claiming to be a physicist and a biologist. My question for you is why do you deny and run away from the religion that has taught you about God? And more important, in what God do you believe?

You may know that by ignoring these two questions it will only make a liar out of you, a fraud, a guy who writes here only to sustain his activity on the forum. That, or a really imbecile hypocrite who knows that he would have no chance to make people believe in God by the very same thing that gave birth to a God, religion, and tries what many apologists try: stick with the science, that works for the youth today. You sick fuck. Answer thosse two questions and it will get more scientific than you would ever hope for.

Indoctrination is so strong that most people do not even know why they believe in the nonsense they believe.

They just believe no matter if it is true or even remotely makes sense.

I think the fear of punishment is what keeps their belief alive.

Ask them where is God? And watch them internalize their incoherent world view.

Sometimes BADecker says God exist outside of this universe, sometimes he says he is hiding in people's souls. Lol...

The real answer is they don't know where God is or what he is.  All made up concept, refined as required.

Well said. The fear of punishment is what kept them in there, a form of legal and spiritual slavery. To know that you are owned and if you do not obey, the big one is going to be really angry about it. I also think there is one more fear keeping them inside, a hypocrite one: the fear of being wrong, the fear that your whole life was a lie. It is a flawed thought that one can not change later. Some say that religion is built inside the human, that it is something that we feel the need for. Well, that does not make it good. We also had and still have a killing instinct inside of us, it doesn't mean we should follow it.

This is almost the complete reason that Horacewoodwood continually resorts to religion rather than science in a science topic. Of course, there is his troll pay, as well.

Because of this, science is a religion for him.

You still have not answered two simple questions that I have asked and all you do is try to find a scapegoat. And it is all so simple, you can not ever answer those questions. Because your linage is religion, your God is your religion. You won't ever deny it, you little slave, because you are not allowed to do so. What you will always do is try to make it look like I am off topic. The truth,the one that you try to hide, is that it is impossible for any human being that believes in God to scientifically prove God without going through religion. That is because religion is the one that brought up a God story in the first place. Denying religion as a believer is the same as denying cause and effect, the principle that you base your proof on. So, there either is a God, or there isn't. And if there is one, it is one that belongs to a religion, because that is how Gods appeared, it is a fact. If you deny religion, you deny God. If you don't, you will have to answer some questions. This is a yes or no, not a maybe, unless God is a maybe for you and we get to the point of 'why the fuck do we even bother'. Until you answer you are nothing but a fraud, a cultist, a fanatic, a retard, an apologist, etc. All of these because you have no clear pathway regarding your position about God.

Are you religion? No. You are fact. The evidence and proof is in the fact that you are posting here. Delete all your posts and your account, and it might be difficult proving that you are fact.

However, believing the things you say, especially if their is no way to prove them, is religion.

Somebody might read your blabber. But if you don't do a little like a scientist, and split it up so that people can see what you are talking about, who cares?

The proof for God has been shown. Your religious attitude is being shown every time you blabber. Perhaps you can get into science sometime. But if you don't, who cares?

religion
rɪˈlɪdʒ(ə)n/Submit
noun
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
"ideas about the relationship between science and religion"
synonyms:   faith, belief, divinity, worship, creed, teaching, doctrine, theology;

According to your bipolar thinking, you bring proof of God. But you are not religious. If you are not religious, that means you do not believe in and worship a God. However, you call me religious, the one who does not believe in any God. You do that because my questions put you in difficulty. That is because you know that absolutely nobody will give a shit on whatever proof you claim to bring if you are religious. You are ashamed with your religion and you dare to bring us 'scientific proof' of the existence of a God saying you made a retarded connection that 'everything is machinery, machinery has creators, that means God is real'. That is all you have, that is your science. Some connections about some laws that you are not able even to define. You are indeed a religious fanatic, because you would do absolutely anything to prove that you have the truth, and that includes even denying your own religion, your God's 'mother'. You are a true Christian.

[Horacewoodwood]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty_Cases_Suggestive_of_Reincarnation

20 cases where the physical evidence is very hard to explain with the normal assumptions about death.

You would be surprised that I know of this book and also read a big part. The stories have been long discussed and there have been some main issues:

1. All of the cases are placed in India, a place where people believe in reincarnation. Most of the stories are quite uncommon, stories that could have been heard around. Children or parents living in an area where reincarnation is a belief could be looking for motives of making it seem real for them.

2. Even if the stories are right, they indeed are suggestive. We are talking about reincarnation, that is a huge discovery, you can not jump to a conclusion so fast. You need a bit more than this. So yes, I do not say it is a lie, it could very well be true, but we can not jump to a conclusion from 20 cases. However, even if one day we discover that reincarnation is true, that does not automatically lead to the proof of a God. Not by far.

I can not rebut the psychological part of this issue, I did not study psychology so my rebuttal is somehow skeptical concerning issue no 1 but I can not possibly say it could not be true, that is what I've said in issue no 2.

Yes I am surprised that you read it, good for you, I do think you need to read more from Dr. Ian Stevenson and those who follow up on his work. Reincarnation and Biology is a real topic and Dr. Stevenon wrote the book on that, the physical evidence indicates more than stories, cultural influence is not sufficient to explain all cases of the reincarnation type such as European cases. The next 40 points of evidence from AECES contains other historic events in parapsychological research, there is a lot of physical and documentary evidence in those cases too. The fact that these events are historical is confirmed by replication studies. These are more than stories, they are historically recorded events and can be reconstructed by a skilled researcher. Other intriguing examples of evidence comes from mediumship which has produced voluminous records of the encounter with the discarnate being, these records can be analyzed just like the spirit contact cases sumarized by AECES. I present to you the most convenient means of establishing the existence of mind existing without a body, so far I have 60 points and you have 1 invalid argument based on the falsified theory of cultural origin.

I fail to see why you've put together Reincarnation with Biology, but I'll let that go for a while. As for my argument, it is not invalid. My first point only talked about a possibility, a thing that Stevenson was also aware of in some cases. My second point says that the evidence is not compelling, it is not enough. Stevenson believed the same, he believed that all that he has done is find enough evidence so people can not say there is absolutely no evidence anymore, but he knew that it was not enough, there was way much more to this. As for the next evidence you are talking about, post a link and I'll look over it. You do not yet have 60 points, you have 1 case that we already talked about. I'm waiting for the links.

P.S.
What's with the link for skeptics, are you afraid I am unaware of how to bring critic to something? )

[BADecker]

You still have not answered two simple questions that I have asked and all you do is try to find a scapegoat. And it is all so simple, you can not ever answer those questions. Because your linage is religion, your God is your religion. You won't ever deny it, you little slave, because you are not allowed to do so. What you will always do is try to make it look like I am off topic. The truth,the one that you try to hide, is that it is impossible for any human being that believes in God to scientifically prove God without going through religion. That is because religion is the one that brought up a God story in the first place. Denying religion as a believer is the same as denying cause and effect, the principle that you base your proof on. So, there either is a God, or there isn't. And if there is one, it is one that belongs to a religion, because that is how Gods appeared, it is a fact. If you deny religion, you deny God. If you don't, you will have to answer some questions. This is a yes or no, not a maybe, unless God is a maybe for you and we get to the point of 'why the fuck do we even bother'. Until you answer you are nothing but a fraud, a cultist, a fanatic, a retard, an apologist, etc. All of these because you have no clear pathway regarding your position about God.

Are you religion? No. You are fact. The evidence and proof is in the fact that you are posting here. Delete all your posts and your account, and it might be difficult proving that you are fact.

However, believing the things you say, especially if their is no way to prove them, is religion.

Somebody might read your blabber. But if you don't do a little like a scientist, and split it up so that people can see what you are talking about, who cares?

The proof for God has been shown. Your religious attitude is being shown every time you blabber. Perhaps you can get into science sometime. But if you don't, who cares?

religion
rɪˈlɪdʒ(ə)n/Submit
noun
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
"ideas about the relationship between science and religion"
synonyms:   faith, belief, divinity, worship, creed, teaching, doctrine, theology;

According to your bipolar thinking, you bring proof of God. But you are not religious. If you are not religious, that means you do not believe in and worship a God. However, you call me religious, the one who does not believe in any God. You do that because my questions put you in difficulty. That is because you know that absolutely nobody will give a shit on whatever proof you claim to bring if you are religious. You are ashamed with your religion and you dare to bring us 'scientific proof' of the existence of a God saying you made a retarded connection that 'everything is machinery, machinery has creators, that means God is real'. That is all you have, that is your science. Some connections about some laws that you are not able even to define. You are indeed a religious fanatic, because you would do absolutely anything to prove that you have the truth, and that includes even denying your own religion, your God's 'mother'. You are a true Christian.

Did you ever browse an encyclopedia? Did you ever notice an entry in an encyclopedia talks about the subject at hand, but not about all the rest of the subjects?

Two of the subjects in this forum are "religion" and "science." Simply because a post talks about one and not the other doesn't have anything to do with what the "poster" believes about the other.

This thread poses the idea and question pertaining to scientific proof for God, not religion. Yet you constantly talk about religion in this thread. Why? Look at the first word in your post I am responding to, above. It is "religion."

It seems that you think the people revolve around being driven off course and onto some other subject, if only you can criticize them enough, and call them names enough. That is exactly the thing that the devil does. The devil accuses people to God constantly. And often he does it from right inside the people he is accusing, themselves.

Are you pleased now? I talked a little religion for you, right inside this science thread. Wouldn't you like to start talking science in this thread a little? Is it true that you can't find even one systematic, step-by-step rebuttal to the fact that God exists?

I am beginning to think that you might be living in the same funny farm with nomad13666 and notbatman... maybe in a different wing?

Come on, now. Open up the links to the proof that God exists, and clarify some thing that you find wrong in the proof, so it is systematically and scientifically rebutted a little. Let's see what you have. But please keep the religion talk in some religious thread. There are many of them in this forum, you know.

[vok-wok_hok]

Well, this god or gods have never made their existence known to me to my best knowledge and all i have as to their supposed existence is from others, which on closer scrutiny have it from still others and so on. So, it all sounds like hearsay to me.

Which leads me to believe that either there are no gods at all or there possibly is some god or gods or super force above it all only it has never had any reason or will or whatever to make its existence known to me or anybody else. Ever.

If you can not prove that this does not exist, it does not mean that there is no god. Simply, you have too little knowledge in this direction and can not find all the answers.

[Astargath]

Did you realize on your own that animals don't invent Gods or you needed help from your cult? I can enumerate you a shitload of things plants and animals do not do, you would be surprised to find out there are differences between us and other living beings. But bravo, your discovery that animals and plants do not praise gods will change the world as we know it, you little genius. On a more serious manner, I know you cultists see yourselves as gods walking the earth, I already said that about you. That's what makes you a fanatic in the first place. On the other hand, no, I do not see myself as a God among nature because I am aware of the reality of things. We reach a conclusion however: you said nature is beyond what mankind can think, therefore God exists. That is false, what is beyond what mankind can think is called supernatural, you should know that. And no, supernatural does not necessarily mean God. It means supernatural and you need evidence to prove that a certain supernatural is a God. That is the flaw in your mindset. That's the 'apology'. Not being able to understand something and immediately calling it God, because you've been taught since birth about God, you grew up in a culture that praises God, your brain is in big difficulty when put to work on rational, scientific things, without implying that a God exists. You are a victim of religion. Do you know what the real issue for most of the islamic immigrants is? They suddenly realized the possibility of the non existence of an after life. That kind of makes them want to live this life, not end it and risk it. The same that gave birth to Gods will also be able to 'kill' them as a 'rule' and keep them as a myth. And I am talking about mankind. It won't happen too soon because, as we can see, religious people know how to 'go with the wave' in order to keep the myth alive. That is why instead of simple, classical christians you now have deists, theists, creationists, and many other ramifications. They don't have an identity anymore because they need to adapt the lie to the modern world and its discoveries. If it was true in the first place, it would have stayed the same.

I am a little curious. Is there any scientific proof for or against the existence of God in all your religious blabber up there? No? I didn't think so.



If you are new to the forum, you can see the scientific proof that God exists here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380.

First post is just you making conclusions from thoughts, no evidence at all, 2nd post you said complexity is diminishing when it's not so it's just false, I stopped reading there but nice ''proof''

[af_newbie]

Did you realize on your own that animals don't invent Gods or you needed help from your cult? I can enumerate you a shitload of things plants and animals do not do, you would be surprised to find out there are differences between us and other living beings. But bravo, your discovery that animals and plants do not praise gods will change the world as we know it, you little genius. On a more serious manner, I know you cultists see yourselves as gods walking the earth, I already said that about you. That's what makes you a fanatic in the first place. On the other hand, no, I do not see myself as a God among nature because I am aware of the reality of things. We reach a conclusion however: you said nature is beyond what mankind can think, therefore God exists. That is false, what is beyond what mankind can think is called supernatural, you should know that. And no, supernatural does not necessarily mean God. It means supernatural and you need evidence to prove that a certain supernatural is a God. That is the flaw in your mindset. That's the 'apology'. Not being able to understand something and immediately calling it God, because you've been taught since birth about God, you grew up in a culture that praises God, your brain is in big difficulty when put to work on rational, scientific things, without implying that a God exists. You are a victim of religion. Do you know what the real issue for most of the islamic immigrants is? They suddenly realized the possibility of the non existence of an after life. That kind of makes them want to live this life, not end it and risk it. The same that gave birth to Gods will also be able to 'kill' them as a 'rule' and keep them as a myth. And I am talking about mankind. It won't happen too soon because, as we can see, religious people know how to 'go with the wave' in order to keep the myth alive. That is why instead of simple, classical christians you now have deists, theists, creationists, and many other ramifications. They don't have an identity anymore because they need to adapt the lie to the modern world and its discoveries. If it was true in the first place, it would have stayed the same.

I am a little curious. Is there any scientific proof for or against the existence of God in all your religious blabber up there? No? I didn't think so.



If you are new to the forum, you can see the scientific proof that God exists here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380.

First post is just you making conclusions from thoughts, no evidence at all, 2nd post you said complexity is diminishing when it's not so it's just false, I stopped reading there but nice ''proof''

FYI, the guy is delusional with his entropy and cause and effect arguments.  Many people debunked his 'proofs' right here on this forum.  He ignored all the replies and keeps posting his nonsense.

The guy is delusional.  Ask him where is God?  He will tell you he is everywhere and nowhere

[BADecker]

Did you realize on your own that animals don't invent Gods or you needed help from your cult? I can enumerate you a shitload of things plants and animals do not do, you would be surprised to find out there are differences between us and other living beings. But bravo, your discovery that animals and plants do not praise gods will change the world as we know it, you little genius. On a more serious manner, I know you cultists see yourselves as gods walking the earth, I already said that about you. That's what makes you a fanatic in the first place. On the other hand, no, I do not see myself as a God among nature because I am aware of the reality of things. We reach a conclusion however: you said nature is beyond what mankind can think, therefore God exists. That is false, what is beyond what mankind can think is called supernatural, you should know that. And no, supernatural does not necessarily mean God. It means supernatural and you need evidence to prove that a certain supernatural is a God. That is the flaw in your mindset. That's the 'apology'. Not being able to understand something and immediately calling it God, because you've been taught since birth about God, you grew up in a culture that praises God, your brain is in big difficulty when put to work on rational, scientific things, without implying that a God exists. You are a victim of religion. Do you know what the real issue for most of the islamic immigrants is? They suddenly realized the possibility of the non existence of an after life. That kind of makes them want to live this life, not end it and risk it. The same that gave birth to Gods will also be able to 'kill' them as a 'rule' and keep them as a myth. And I am talking about mankind. It won't happen too soon because, as we can see, religious people know how to 'go with the wave' in order to keep the myth alive. That is why instead of simple, classical christians you now have deists, theists, creationists, and many other ramifications. They don't have an identity anymore because they need to adapt the lie to the modern world and its discoveries. If it was true in the first place, it would have stayed the same.

I am a little curious. Is there any scientific proof for or against the existence of God in all your religious blabber up there? No? I didn't think so.



If you are new to the forum, you can see the scientific proof that God exists here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380.

First post is just you making conclusions from thoughts, no evidence at all, 2nd post you said complexity is diminishing when it's not so it's just false, I stopped reading there but nice ''proof''

FYI, the guy is delusional with his entropy and cause and effect arguments.  Many people debunked his 'proofs' right here on this forum.  He ignored all the replies and keeps posting his nonsense.

The guy is delusional.  Ask him where is God?  He will tell you he is everywhere and nowhere

Well actually, you folks who are against the proof that God exists are delusional. Why? Many times I have shown the proofs. But nobody has come up with explanations of why the proofs don't "work."

You may not like the proofs. You may wish the proofs were not so. You may wish that God doesn't exist. But you haven't been able to show that He doesn't exist.

Come on. Do a scientific-like step-by-step rebuttal if you can. Pick even one point and do something more than just talk that it doesn't prove God. You can't, can you. All you can do is say that the proof isn't proof. Sounds like faith to me. You are trying to have faith that God doesn't exist, right in the face of the scientific proof that He DOES exist.

[Astargath]

Did you realize on your own that animals don't invent Gods or you needed help from your cult? I can enumerate you a shitload of things plants and animals do not do, you would be surprised to find out there are differences between us and other living beings. But bravo, your discovery that animals and plants do not praise gods will change the world as we know it, you little genius. On a more serious manner, I know you cultists see yourselves as gods walking the earth, I already said that about you. That's what makes you a fanatic in the first place. On the other hand, no, I do not see myself as a God among nature because I am aware of the reality of things. We reach a conclusion however: you said nature is beyond what mankind can think, therefore God exists. That is false, what is beyond what mankind can think is called supernatural, you should know that. And no, supernatural does not necessarily mean God. It means supernatural and you need evidence to prove that a certain supernatural is a God. That is the flaw in your mindset. That's the 'apology'. Not being able to understand something and immediately calling it God, because you've been taught since birth about God, you grew up in a culture that praises God, your brain is in big difficulty when put to work on rational, scientific things, without implying that a God exists. You are a victim of religion. Do you know what the real issue for most of the islamic immigrants is? They suddenly realized the possibility of the non existence of an after life. That kind of makes them want to live this life, not end it and risk it. The same that gave birth to Gods will also be able to 'kill' them as a 'rule' and keep them as a myth. And I am talking about mankind. It won't happen too soon because, as we can see, religious people know how to 'go with the wave' in order to keep the myth alive. That is why instead of simple, classical christians you now have deists, theists, creationists, and many other ramifications. They don't have an identity anymore because they need to adapt the lie to the modern world and its discoveries. If it was true in the first place, it would have stayed the same.

I am a little curious. Is there any scientific proof for or against the existence of God in all your religious blabber up there? No? I didn't think so.



If you are new to the forum, you can see the scientific proof that God exists here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380.

First post is just you making conclusions from thoughts, no evidence at all, 2nd post you said complexity is diminishing when it's not so it's just false, I stopped reading there but nice ''proof''

FYI, the guy is delusional with his entropy and cause and effect arguments.  Many people debunked his 'proofs' right here on this forum.  He ignored all the replies and keeps posting his nonsense.

The guy is delusional.  Ask him where is God?  He will tell you he is everywhere and nowhere

Well actually, you folks who are against the proof that God exists are delusional. Why? Many times I have shown the proofs. But nobody has come up with explanations of why the proofs don't "work."

You may not like the proofs. You may wish the proofs were not so. You may wish that God doesn't exist. But you haven't been able to show that He doesn't exist.

Come on. Do a scientific-like step-by-step rebuttal if you can. Pick even one point and do something more than just talk that it doesn't prove God. You can't, can you. All you can do is say that the proof isn't proof. Sounds like faith to me. You are trying to have faith that God doesn't exist, right in the face of the scientific proof that He DOES exist.

I already did, what you said about the complexity of the universe is false the entropy is always increasing not decreasing.

You said

''The progression is that, as the machines that people make and use are far more advanced than the ones that animals make and use, so are the machines that exist in nature far more advanced than the ones that people make and use. The advanced machines of the universe have an advanced Maker - God. Machines have makers.''

What are the ''machines'' in nature?


'' are produced by causes, whatever the causes may be. This means that the machinery of the universe, including mankind and his thinking, was designed by a Great First Cause, Which set everything in motion.''

This argument that was made really long ago is a loop, what was the cause for god then? And if your answer is something like: god has always been or has no cause the same answer can be applied to the universe


''The nations look for God.''

As time passes less and less people believe in God. Most respected scientists do not believe in God.

[BADecker]

Well actually, you folks who are against the proof that God exists are delusional. Why? Many times I have shown the proofs. But nobody has come up with explanations of why the proofs don't "work."

You may not like the proofs. You may wish the proofs were not so. You may wish that God doesn't exist. But you haven't been able to show that He doesn't exist.

Come on. Do a scientific-like step-by-step rebuttal if you can. Pick even one point and do something more than just talk that it doesn't prove God. You can't, can you. All you can do is say that the proof isn't proof. Sounds like faith to me. You are trying to have faith that God doesn't exist, right in the face of the scientific proof that He DOES exist.

I already did, what you said about the complexity of the universe is false the entropy is always increasing not decreasing.

What did you already do? I said that entropy is increasing and that complexity is decreasing.

You said

''The progression is that, as the machines that people make and use are far more advanced than the ones that animals make and use, so are the machines that exist in nature far more advanced than the ones that people make and use. The advanced machines of the universe have an advanced Maker - God. Machines have makers.''

What are the ''machines'' in nature?

The machines in nature are the whole way nature acts. Nature is full of "levers" and leverages, all working in great complexity in whatever happens in nature.

'' are produced by causes, whatever the causes may be. This means that the machinery of the universe, including mankind and his thinking, was designed by a Great First Cause, Which set everything in motion.''

This argument that was made really long ago is a loop, what was the cause for god then? And if your answer is something like: god has always been or has no cause the same answer can be applied to the universe

You never find anything that makes something to be part of the thing that it makes before it makes it. Same with God. Before He made nature, He wasn't part of it. So why would anyone think that He has to obey the laws of nature?

''The nations look for God.''

As time passes less and less people believe in God. Most respected scientists do not believe in God.

God doesn't respect the scientists that don't believe in God. God doesn't respect anyone who doesn't believe in Him. If a person is not respected by God, how does that hurt me? I respect god, and He respects me because of it.

[Astargath]

Well actually, you folks who are against the proof that God exists are delusional. Why? Many times I have shown the proofs. But nobody has come up with explanations of why the proofs don't "work."

You may not like the proofs. You may wish the proofs were not so. You may wish that God doesn't exist. But you haven't been able to show that He doesn't exist.

Come on. Do a scientific-like step-by-step rebuttal if you can. Pick even one point and do something more than just talk that it doesn't prove God. You can't, can you. All you can do is say that the proof isn't proof. Sounds like faith to me. You are trying to have faith that God doesn't exist, right in the face of the scientific proof that He DOES exist.

I already did, what you said about the complexity of the universe is false the entropy is always increasing not decreasing.

What did you already do? I said that entropy is increasing and that complexity is decreasing.

You said

''The progression is that, as the machines that people make and use are far more advanced than the ones that animals make and use, so are the machines that exist in nature far more advanced than the ones that people make and use. The advanced machines of the universe have an advanced Maker - God. Machines have makers.''

What are the ''machines'' in nature?

The machines in nature are the whole way nature acts. Nature is full of "levers" and leverages, all working in great complexity in whatever happens in nature.

'' are produced by causes, whatever the causes may be. This means that the machinery of the universe, including mankind and his thinking, was designed by a Great First Cause, Which set everything in motion.''

This argument that was made really long ago is a loop, what was the cause for god then? And if your answer is something like: god has always been or has no cause the same answer can be applied to the universe

You never find anything that makes something to be part of the thing that it makes before it makes it. Same with God. Before He made nature, He wasn't part of it. So why would anyone think that He has to obey the laws of nature?

''The nations look for God.''

As time passes less and less people believe in God. Most respected scientists do not believe in God.

God doesn't respect the scientists that don't believe in God. God doesn't respect anyone who doesn't believe in Him. If a person is not respected by God, how does that hurt me? I respect god, and He respects me because of it.

You never find anything that makes something to be part of the thing that it makes before it makes it. Same with the universe

[steveabrahams]

Science and Religion can't be same.

[BADecker]

Science and Religion can't be same.

God isn't religion. It is people who often think that He is.

God made science. He is way beyond science. He shows us that He exists through science.

[BADecker]

Well actually, you folks who are against the proof that God exists are delusional. Why? Many times I have shown the proofs. But nobody has come up with explanations of why the proofs don't "work."

You may not like the proofs. You may wish the proofs were not so. You may wish that God doesn't exist. But you haven't been able to show that He doesn't exist.

Come on. Do a scientific-like step-by-step rebuttal if you can. Pick even one point and do something more than just talk that it doesn't prove God. You can't, can you. All you can do is say that the proof isn't proof. Sounds like faith to me. You are trying to have faith that God doesn't exist, right in the face of the scientific proof that He DOES exist.

I already did, what you said about the complexity of the universe is false the entropy is always increasing not decreasing.

What did you already do? I said that entropy is increasing and that complexity is decreasing.

You said

''The progression is that, as the machines that people make and use are far more advanced than the ones that animals make and use, so are the machines that exist in nature far more advanced than the ones that people make and use. The advanced machines of the universe have an advanced Maker - God. Machines have makers.''

What are the ''machines'' in nature?

The machines in nature are the whole way nature acts. Nature is full of "levers" and leverages, all working in great complexity in whatever happens in nature.

'' are produced by causes, whatever the causes may be. This means that the machinery of the universe, including mankind and his thinking, was designed by a Great First Cause, Which set everything in motion.''

This argument that was made really long ago is a loop, what was the cause for god then? And if your answer is something like: god has always been or has no cause the same answer can be applied to the universe

You never find anything that makes something to be part of the thing that it makes before it makes it. Same with God. Before He made nature, He wasn't part of it. So why would anyone think that He has to obey the laws of nature?

''The nations look for God.''

As time passes less and less people believe in God. Most respected scientists do not believe in God.

God doesn't respect the scientists that don't believe in God. God doesn't respect anyone who doesn't believe in Him. If a person is not respected by God, how does that hurt me? I respect god, and He respects me because of it.

You never find anything that makes something to be part of the thing that it makes before it makes it. Same with the universe

The difference is that there is no evidence that the universe makes anything. The universe simply operates with what it has. Second Law of Thermodynamics.

[Horacewoodwood]

You still have not answered two simple questions that I have asked and all you do is try to find a scapegoat. And it is all so simple, you can not ever answer those questions. Because your linage is religion, your God is your religion. You won't ever deny it, you little slave, because you are not allowed to do so. What you will always do is try to make it look like I am off topic. The truth,the one that you try to hide, is that it is impossible for any human being that believes in God to scientifically prove God without going through religion. That is because religion is the one that brought up a God story in the first place. Denying religion as a believer is the same as denying cause and effect, the principle that you base your proof on. So, there either is a God, or there isn't. And if there is one, it is one that belongs to a religion, because that is how Gods appeared, it is a fact. If you deny religion, you deny God. If you don't, you will have to answer some questions. This is a yes or no, not a maybe, unless God is a maybe for you and we get to the point of 'why the fuck do we even bother'. Until you answer you are nothing but a fraud, a cultist, a fanatic, a retard, an apologist, etc. All of these because you have no clear pathway regarding your position about God.

Are you religion? No. You are fact. The evidence and proof is in the fact that you are posting here. Delete all your posts and your account, and it might be difficult proving that you are fact.

However, believing the things you say, especially if their is no way to prove them, is religion.

Somebody might read your blabber. But if you don't do a little like a scientist, and split it up so that people can see what you are talking about, who cares?

The proof for God has been shown. Your religious attitude is being shown every time you blabber. Perhaps you can get into science sometime. But if you don't, who cares?

religion
rɪˈlɪdʒ(ə)n/Submit
noun
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
"ideas about the relationship between science and religion"
synonyms:   faith, belief, divinity, worship, creed, teaching, doctrine, theology;

According to your bipolar thinking, you bring proof of God. But you are not religious. If you are not religious, that means you do not believe in and worship a God. However, you call me religious, the one who does not believe in any God. You do that because my questions put you in difficulty. That is because you know that absolutely nobody will give a shit on whatever proof you claim to bring if you are religious. You are ashamed with your religion and you dare to bring us 'scientific proof' of the existence of a God saying you made a retarded connection that 'everything is machinery, machinery has creators, that means God is real'. That is all you have, that is your science. Some connections about some laws that you are not able even to define. You are indeed a religious fanatic, because you would do absolutely anything to prove that you have the truth, and that includes even denying your own religion, your God's 'mother'. You are a true Christian.

Did you ever browse an encyclopedia? Did you ever notice an entry in an encyclopedia talks about the subject at hand, but not about all the rest of the subjects?

Two of the subjects in this forum are "religion" and "science." Simply because a post talks about one and not the other doesn't have anything to do with what the "poster" believes about the other.

This thread poses the idea and question pertaining to scientific proof for God, not religion. Yet you constantly talk about religion in this thread. Why? Look at the first word in your post I am responding to, above. It is "religion."

It seems that you think the people revolve around being driven off course and onto some other subject, if only you can criticize them enough, and call them names enough. That is exactly the thing that the devil does. The devil accuses people to God constantly. And often he does it from right inside the people he is accusing, themselves.

Are you pleased now? I talked a little religion for you, right inside this science thread. Wouldn't you like to start talking science in this thread a little? Is it true that you can't find even one systematic, step-by-step rebuttal to the fact that God exists?

I am beginning to think that you might be living in the same funny farm with nomad13666 and notbatman... maybe in a different wing?

Come on, now. Open up the links to the proof that God exists, and clarify some thing that you find wrong in the proof, so it is systematically and scientifically rebutted a little. Let's see what you have. But please keep the religion talk in some religious thread. There are many of them in this forum, you know.

I am sorry, dear retard, I already rebutted your links and you ignored the rebuttal, the same that you did with everyone else. However, you act as if your links would be scientific, while they are not. There is one single presumption about God and it is not proved, nor valid. As a scientist, which you claim to be, you must know that exceptional claims call for exceptional evidence. Well, your proof is far under 'pathetic'. If you are a scientist, physics and logic are clearly not your strong points. If you are not a scientist, and that is the most probable thing, I wonder why do you believe that your belief would ever count as proof without the actual evidence, without a definition of the phenomenon called God, etc. Now, watch how stupid you are comparing me to the devil. I've presented to you the reason why religion is important here before, but you ignored it because it was true and hurtful. Religion is the ID card of your God, it is the big bang of your God, it is the only way you came to find out about a God. If it were for science, you would not be on this forum claiming to 'scientifically prove God' because there would be no such idea. History my friend, is a part of science. According to your religion, we can trace things back, we can historically prove them wrong or not. We can also find out the characteristics of your God through religion. Yet, you deny it, you try to make it seem it is my capricious will whilst it is in fact a must. All of that is because, as I've said earlier, you know that it's a lost battle, all you are trying to do is ignore the truthful facts and try your way with what you believe is 'science'.

[Astargath]

Well actually, you folks who are against the proof that God exists are delusional. Why? Many times I have shown the proofs. But nobody has come up with explanations of why the proofs don't "work."

You may not like the proofs. You may wish the proofs were not so. You may wish that God doesn't exist. But you haven't been able to show that He doesn't exist.

Come on. Do a scientific-like step-by-step rebuttal if you can. Pick even one point and do something more than just talk that it doesn't prove God. You can't, can you. All you can do is say that the proof isn't proof. Sounds like faith to me. You are trying to have faith that God doesn't exist, right in the face of the scientific proof that He DOES exist.

I already did, what you said about the complexity of the universe is false the entropy is always increasing not decreasing.

What did you already do? I said that entropy is increasing and that complexity is decreasing.

You said

''The progression is that, as the machines that people make and use are far more advanced than the ones that animals make and use, so are the machines that exist in nature far more advanced than the ones that people make and use. The advanced machines of the universe have an advanced Maker - God. Machines have makers.''

What are the ''machines'' in nature?

The machines in nature are the whole way nature acts. Nature is full of "levers" and leverages, all working in great complexity in whatever happens in nature.

'' are produced by causes, whatever the causes may be. This means that the machinery of the universe, including mankind and his thinking, was designed by a Great First Cause, Which set everything in motion.''

This argument that was made really long ago is a loop, what was the cause for god then? And if your answer is something like: god has always been or has no cause the same answer can be applied to the universe

You never find anything that makes something to be part of the thing that it makes before it makes it. Same with God. Before He made nature, He wasn't part of it. So why would anyone think that He has to obey the laws of nature?

''The nations look for God.''

As time passes less and less people believe in God. Most respected scientists do not believe in God.

God doesn't respect the scientists that don't believe in God. God doesn't respect anyone who doesn't believe in Him. If a person is not respected by God, how does that hurt me? I respect god, and He respects me because of it.

You never find anything that makes something to be part of the thing that it makes before it makes it. Same with the universe

The difference is that there is no evidence that the universe makes anything. The universe simply operates with what it has. Second Law of Thermodynamics.

There is no evidence that god makes anything either sorry.

Humans, animals, plants, all evolved, they were once very simple and they have evolved to become complex, God would have made us complex from the beginning besides humans are so badly designed, why would a God make humans so imperfect, he wouldn't.

[BADecker]

Well actually, you folks who are against the proof that God exists are delusional. Why? Many times I have shown the proofs. But nobody has come up with explanations of why the proofs don't "work."

You may not like the proofs. You may wish the proofs were not so. You may wish that God doesn't exist. But you haven't been able to show that He doesn't exist.

Come on. Do a scientific-like step-by-step rebuttal if you can. Pick even one point and do something more than just talk that it doesn't prove God. You can't, can you. All you can do is say that the proof isn't proof. Sounds like faith to me. You are trying to have faith that God doesn't exist, right in the face of the scientific proof that He DOES exist.

I already did, what you said about the complexity of the universe is false the entropy is always increasing not decreasing.

What did you already do? I said that entropy is increasing and that complexity is decreasing.

You said

''The progression is that, as the machines that people make and use are far more advanced than the ones that animals make and use, so are the machines that exist in nature far more advanced than the ones that people make and use. The advanced machines of the universe have an advanced Maker - God. Machines have makers.''

What are the ''machines'' in nature?

The machines in nature are the whole way nature acts. Nature is full of "levers" and leverages, all working in great complexity in whatever happens in nature.

'' are produced by causes, whatever the causes may be. This means that the machinery of the universe, including mankind and his thinking, was designed by a Great First Cause, Which set everything in motion.''

This argument that was made really long ago is a loop, what was the cause for god then? And if your answer is something like: god has always been or has no cause the same answer can be applied to the universe

You never find anything that makes something to be part of the thing that it makes before it makes it. Same with God. Before He made nature, He wasn't part of it. So why would anyone think that He has to obey the laws of nature?

''The nations look for God.''

As time passes less and less people believe in God. Most respected scientists do not believe in God.

God doesn't respect the scientists that don't believe in God. God doesn't respect anyone who doesn't believe in Him. If a person is not respected by God, how does that hurt me? I respect god, and He respects me because of it.

You never find anything that makes something to be part of the thing that it makes before it makes it. Same with the universe

The difference is that there is no evidence that the universe makes anything. The universe simply operates with what it has. Second Law of Thermodynamics.

There is no evidence that god makes anything either sorry.

Humans, animals, plants, all evolved, they were once very simple and they have evolved to become complex, God would have made us complex from the beginning besides humans are so badly designed, why would a God make humans so imperfect, he wouldn't.

Evolution. Fun theory. But all the evidence fits creation as well. And there is a ton of science law that says evolution is impossible. Time to get back from evolution science fiction to reality... creation.

God DID make us complex from the beginning. Entropy not only suggests devolution, but upholds it. Entropy... reverse evolution.

Did God make entropy? No! We did, by committing the first sin... doubting God.