Scientific proof that God exists?

[Mintycash]

I take very long posts as two possible things:

-1: An attempt to lecture others (Implying your own superiority or possesion of truth).
-2: The equivalent of shouting.

I listen to none of those when having a discussion (That's just me, noone, other people might love it).

Also, saying that a webpage contains the proof of god's existance ignores that there was no internet access during most of the human history.
IMHO, a god should care for people of all ages and the same truth should have been readily available for all social classes now and 5000 years ago. Sure such a powerful being can manage that. The same can be said about books...

Such readily available knowledge does not exist, therefore... (Use logic to finish the phrase).

[Astargath]

Where are the applications.

Science is not about applications. It is about evaluating evidence and making observations. I showed you the tests, now you must evaluate the evidence and come to a conclusion. There is no logical reason to reject the wealth of evidence I have presented.

In fact I already showed some applications in this link: http://www.thiaoouba.com/kir.htm

Before arguing the point, try reading the evidence.

An obscure webpage about magic, go figure. One day you will learn the fact that magic is not real, maybe it takes you 20 years but I guarantee you, you will never see someone perform telekinesis stop being ridiculous, real scientists have stopped looking into it decades ago.

Real scientists like Crookes have been conducting tests since the 19th century. These Russian researchers are using Kirlian photography, not magic... Why do you reject the evidence without examining it?

They have and they realized telekinesis is bullshit that's why no one is talking about it anymore, only nutjobs like you. I'm a random person, you don't need me to examine the evidence, other real scientists have and they have got to the conclusion that it doesn't exist. Psychokinesis experiments have historically been criticized for lack of proper controls and repeatability.[7][8][9][10] There is no convincing evidence that psychokinesis is a real phenomenon, and the topic is generally regarded as pseudoscience.[7][11][12][13]
There is a broad scientific consensus that PK research, and parapsychology more generally, have not produced a reliable, repeatable demonstration

The ideas of psychokinesis and telekinesis violate several well-established laws of physics, including the inverse square law, the second law of thermodynamics, and the conservation of momentum.[79][91] Because of this, scientists have demanded a high standard of evidence for PK, in line with Marcello Truzzi's dictum "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof".[10][92] The Occam's razor law of parsimony in scientific explanations of phenomena suggests that the explanation of PK in terms of ordinary ways — by trickery, special effects or by poor experimental design — is preferable to accepting that the laws of physics should be rewritten

Internationally there are individual skeptics of the paranormal and skeptics' organizations who offer cash prize money for demonstration of the existence of an extraordinary psychic power, such as psychokinesis.[110] Prizes have been offered specifically for PK demonstrations: for example, businessman Gerald Fleming's offer of £250,000 to Uri Geller if he can bend a spoon under controlled conditions.[111] The James Randi Educational Foundation offered the One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge to any accepted candidate who managed to produce a paranormal event in a controlled, mutually agreed upon experiment.

Please, stop believing in magic, you are an adult.

[qwik2learn]

The experiment I just mentioned is about ingesting ORMEs, you can try it on yourself and repeat it on a daily basis until you are convinced that there is something inside the sea salt which affects the mind.

Regarding TK, the evidence goes back to the 19th century, many eminent researchers have conducted their own tests:
https://www.quora.com/Is-telekinesis-scientifically-true/answers/17777933
Another good link mentioned in another answer to that question:
http://www.thiaoouba.com/kir.htm

Once skeptics replicate these tests and find that there is nothing interesting going on, then they will be justified in their claim that there is no evidence. Science is on the side of parapsychology, not the pseudo-skeptics who fail to conduct tests of their own.

[Astargath]

The experiment I just mentioned is about ingesting ORMEs, you can try it on yourself and repeat it on a daily basis until you are convinced that there is something inside the sea salt which affects the mind.

Regarding TK, the evidence goes back to the 19th century, many eminent researchers have conducted their own tests:
https://www.quora.com/Is-telekinesis-scientifically-true/answers/17777933
Another good link mentioned in another answer to that question:
http://www.thiaoouba.com/kir.htm

Once skeptics replicate these tests and find that there is nothing interesting going on, then they will be justified in their claim that there is no evidence. Science is on the side of parapsychology, not the pseudo-skeptics who fail to conduct tests of their own.

Get over it, magic is not real, why is it so hard to accept it, what do you gain from this? This thread is also about proving god, not proving magic. I won't replicate shit, show me people moving shit with their minds and I will believe you, no need for stupid experiments, it's really that easy, we would see them everywhere, yet no one has seen someone move something with their mind unless there is a magician performing LUL

[qwik2learn]

Get over it, magic is not real, why is it so hard to accept it, what do you gain from this?

I proved that consciousness is a primary force in the universe and these tests have been conducted since the 19th century. You failed to consider that the tests could be valid because you think you know everything already.

I get to prove that you do not care about science and testing the structure of the universe.

This thread is also about proving god, not proving magic. I won't replicate shit, show me people moving shit with their minds and I will believe you, no need for stupid experiments, it's really that easy, we would see them everywhere, yet no one has seen someone move something with their mind unless there is a magician performing LUL

There is a need for experiments in this thread, since it is all about science. The tests show that matter reduces to consciousness, not vice versa. You do not care about these tests but that is what they prove.

[qwik2learn]

Regarding TK, the evidence goes back to the 19th century, many eminent researchers have conducted their own tests:
https://www.quora.com/Is-telekinesis-scientifically-true/answers/17777933

There is a group of atheists who call themselves skeptics that display an almost religious need to deny this research. It’s just weird, but they’re very serious about it. It’s their version of religious intolerance.

Evidence doesn’t magically disappear when it’s contested. It just means that there’s disagreement.

There is plenty of evidence for psychic ability and it is a bald faced lie to say that there isn’t.

[BADecker]

The very concept of God is something that can't be proven. And this to me it's something that is only possible in the world of fantasy.

  Exactly.  If a god does exist, it must exist outside of the universe that it created.

The concept of God is easy to prove. Here's how. The concept of the universe is so vast that it is impossible for the universe to exist, except that it does. There is no source that we understand for the existence of the universe. Because of the complexity in the universe, the source is God no matter what He/It is.


God doesn't necessarily exist outside of the universe. Rather, He existed without the universe before He created it. Once He brought the universe into being, God might have existed within or without or both. Why can we say this? God is so different, and so much more powerful than anything that we know, that we don't know what His capabilities are.

[BADecker]

I take my very long posts to mean I have clearly done more work than most on this very particular subject, particular in that some would describe myself as an athiest, me I still question even this.

As an Athiest, I may say I do N0T believe in god, but I cant, because I know of a higher scource, just as the scummy masonic paedo's are beneath even athiest's.. feet... freemasons are now the holy unclean, constantly washing the blood of kids souls from the sweat of their brow, even whilst they plan the next meeting where they go down on bended knee.. the most sexually depraved people make freemasonry what it is today, no-one else..

An athiest believes in no god. 0r so they say. 0ther's would say we believe in no-thing, but since no thing does not exist, since no-thing in itself is zero or 0.

Now as an athiest, I may say that I believe in '0' proving God's signature, or loop of life., In my opinion, I cant not believe in god, based entirely on what I write, for I clearly have a knowledge of both god and the devil proving they do in fact exist, why the jews wont admit this signature, because god is the circle of life, not the endless path of death, that the jews would be placing in the upcoming quatermass incident in israel.

Every mofo here knows the second coming is of lucifer, and all they'll do is shit themselves when that happens, until then, they rule the world, because they sold their kids soul's or they'd be akin to the fuckin immigrants.. they'd have no-thing. Like the poor profane tey trod on everyday... like badicker n vod used to do with me.

and to quote from a very particular txt from a mason:

(It's in capitals cause that's the way it is, you can say you think capitals is shouting, but when I ask if am I loud enough, will you hear me?)

THERE IS NOT A SINGLE MAN WHO HAS THE POWER TO INVESTIGATE THE MYSTERIOUS WAYS OF INTELLIGENCE. THERE IS NOT A BEING WHICH IS CAPABLE OF TRUE FAITH. ONLY IN THE IDIOCY OF THE COMMON SOUL IS THERE A PROVEN FUTURE. THE PARTITIONS OF HISTORY HAVE TAUGHT US NOT TO DOUBT INSANITY AND ITS VIRTUES, AND SO THOSE CONDEMNED TO THIS LIFE ARE FOREVER DESTITUTE OF UNDERSTANDING. THESE ARE THE RAMBLINGS OF AN OLD WITHERED SOUL. I AM DEAD YET I CANNOT BE, FOR I AM GOD.

WHAT IS TO BE MADE OF THIS LUNACY? A TRIUMPH OF PERSONAL SACRIFICE PERHAPS. ALLOW THE SICKLE ROOM TO WORK ITS DEED. LET YOURSELVES FLOURISH IN ITS BEAUTY. ALL IS GONE AND YET WE LIVE ON, HARVESTING EACH DAY WITH THE HOPE, OVERPOWERING THIS INDIGNATION. THIS CONTEMPT OF REALITY IS DISPLEASING.

AND SO WITHOUT HASTE I EMBARK UPON MY JOURNEY, WANDERING FREE OF HUMANITY AND ITS DISGUST. IN THESE RUINS OF WHERE ONCE EXISTED A SPITEFUL COMMUNIST SOCIETY, I LEAVE TRUST. HATRED. GUILT. SORROW. THE FLESH AND BLOOD OF MAN! EMBRACE IT. ALLOW YOUR TEETH TO SINK INTO ITS RICHNESS. WHEN ALL IS CALM, A LONE SOUL WILL SPEAK. LEARN FROM IT. LEARN FROM YOURSELF. INSANITY IS A TERRIBLE THING TO WASTE.


THANK YOU, MY AUDIENCE...

Your self-contradiction is that God reveals Himself. It's simply that God reveals Himself in ways that He wants to... not in the ways we want Him to.

One example in the things you say: "THERE IS NOT A SINGLE MAN WHO HAS THE POWER TO INVESTIGATE THE MYSTERIOUS WAYS OF INTELLIGENCE." Yet God reveals that He exists simply through the fact that there is intelligence.

Thanks for showing us that God exists.

[carizmerlin31]

Yes i believe in that too! Science is created to prove that God really exists!

[BADecker]

If bible, koran, torah and other holy scriptures are wrong this will not prove that there is no God. If there is a God there is no way we can prove his existence if he don't want to. Our civilization is still very young, still many things we cannot explained.

As was said directly above your post, God made science to prove his existence. Actually, He made science so we could prove His existence to ourselves.

All the holy books in the world might be wrong, but science still proves God's existence.

[fabioganga]

Hebrews 3:4 gives you the best proof that God exists...

"For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God."

We have no problem believing that a smartwatch cannot just come out of "chance". If we had its parts and kept stirring them in a pot, even after BILLIONS of years it would never turn into a smart watch.

Yet, many believe that our UNIVERSE, the perfect COLLECTION of infallible watches was made by chance and no divine intervention!

As well, wherever there are LAWS there is a legislator behind. Laws don't just happen by chance.

And there are BILLIONS of laws governing our earth and the universe... hence there must be a Greater Legislator behind.

It's plain logic, it simply can't be otherwise.

[BCEmporium]

If bible, koran, torah and other holy scriptures are wrong this will not prove that there is no God. If there is a God there is no way we can prove his existence if he don't want to. Our civilization is still very young, still many things we cannot explained.

As was said directly above your post, God made science to prove his existence. Actually, He made science so we could prove His existence to ourselves.

All the holy books in the world might be wrong, but science still proves God's existence.

All of science is based on statistics and not on immutable facts. All of science is circular as well, so it's not really possible to prove anything in the strictest sense of the word. That also means that there very well might not be anything that requires any proof and that people who chase such are just enjoying their time on earth by making up statements that they feel need to be proven (or not).

[oratak]

I really dont believe that god exists.. If u believe it or not will depend on how u are educated.

[BADecker]

If bible, koran, torah and other holy scriptures are wrong this will not prove that there is no God. If there is a God there is no way we can prove his existence if he don't want to. Our civilization is still very young, still many things we cannot explained.

As was said directly above your post, God made science to prove his existence. Actually, He made science so we could prove His existence to ourselves.

All the holy books in the world might be wrong, but science still proves God's existence.

Science can't really prove anything. All of science is based on statistics and not on immutable facts. All of science is circular as well, so it's not really possible to prove anything in the strictest sense of the word. That also means that there very well might not be anything that requires any proof and that people who chase such are just enjoying their time on earth by making up statements that they feel need to be proven (or not).

There is no way to prove that there is any Internet, that we are posting on Bitcointalk, that we exist, etc.  We can't even prove whether or not we are a figment of our own imagination.

However, in the common, standard scientific understanding of things, we can scientifically prove that God exists.

[Astargath]

If bible, koran, torah and other holy scriptures are wrong this will not prove that there is no God. If there is a God there is no way we can prove his existence if he don't want to. Our civilization is still very young, still many things we cannot explained.

As was said directly above your post, God made science to prove his existence. Actually, He made science so we could prove His existence to ourselves.

All the holy books in the world might be wrong, but science still proves God's existence.

Science can't really prove anything. All of science is based on statistics and not on immutable facts. All of science is circular as well, so it's not really possible to prove anything in the strictest sense of the word. That also means that there very well might not be anything that requires any proof and that people who chase such are just enjoying their time on earth by making up statements that they feel need to be proven (or not).

There is no way to prove that there is any Internet, that we are posting on Bitcointalk, that we exist, etc.  We can't even prove whether or not we are a figment of our own imagination.

However, in the common, standard scientific understanding of things, we can scientifically prove that God exists.

Yet there is no such thing as a ''god theory'' or anything even close to that in the whole scientific community. You are the only one claiming you can prove god and you have failed every time, first by not understanding the principles you preach (entropy or cause and effect) and secondly for assuming a lot of stuff all the time just like you are against methods of dating because we can't know whether radioactive decay has always been constant we also can't know if everything always had a cause and we can't certainly know, at least right now, what the first cause of the universe is, scientific research suggests it's the big bang not god.

[burnstuff]

the bitcoin whitepaper

[BADecker]

If bible, koran, torah and other holy scriptures are wrong this will not prove that there is no God. If there is a God there is no way we can prove his existence if he don't want to. Our civilization is still very young, still many things we cannot explained.

As was said directly above your post, God made science to prove his existence. Actually, He made science so we could prove His existence to ourselves.

All the holy books in the world might be wrong, but science still proves God's existence.

Science can't really prove anything. All of science is based on statistics and not on immutable facts. All of science is circular as well, so it's not really possible to prove anything in the strictest sense of the word. That also means that there very well might not be anything that requires any proof and that people who chase such are just enjoying their time on earth by making up statements that they feel need to be proven (or not).

There is no way to prove that there is any Internet, that we are posting on Bitcointalk, that we exist, etc.  We can't even prove whether or not we are a figment of our own imagination.

However, in the common, standard scientific understanding of things, we can scientifically prove that God exists.

Yet there is no such thing as a ''god theory'' or anything even close to that in the whole scientific community. You are the only one claiming you can prove god and you have failed every time, first by not understanding the principles you preach (entropy or cause and effect) and secondly for assuming a lot of stuff all the time just like you are against methods of dating because we can't know whether radioactive decay has always been constant we also can't know if everything always had a cause and we can't certainly know, at least right now, what the first cause of the universe is, scientific research suggests it's the big bang not god.

The reason there might not be a "God" theory is, at the time scientific theories started to come into being, most people understood that God exists. Science theories were developed by radical scientists who wanted to prove anything other than the existence of God, including that God does NOT exist. So, you might say that theories like Big Bang are theories against the existence of God.

By attempting to stretch theories about entropy and cause and effect into laws that destroy the ways that entropy and cause and effect exist, science is simply making more theories. Entropy and C&E laws exist as laws differently than the theories about them. You are constantly trying to apply theoretical stuff in ways different than the laws state. You will always fail at this, even though you say that you aren't failing. Of course, when you can prove that they exist differently than the laws currently state, then the laws will be changed.

[Astargath]

If bible, koran, torah and other holy scriptures are wrong this will not prove that there is no God. If there is a God there is no way we can prove his existence if he don't want to. Our civilization is still very young, still many things we cannot explained.

As was said directly above your post, God made science to prove his existence. Actually, He made science so we could prove His existence to ourselves.

All the holy books in the world might be wrong, but science still proves God's existence.

Science can't really prove anything. All of science is based on statistics and not on immutable facts. All of science is circular as well, so it's not really possible to prove anything in the strictest sense of the word. That also means that there very well might not be anything that requires any proof and that people who chase such are just enjoying their time on earth by making up statements that they feel need to be proven (or not).

There is no way to prove that there is any Internet, that we are posting on Bitcointalk, that we exist, etc.  We can't even prove whether or not we are a figment of our own imagination.

However, in the common, standard scientific understanding of things, we can scientifically prove that God exists.

Yet there is no such thing as a ''god theory'' or anything even close to that in the whole scientific community. You are the only one claiming you can prove god and you have failed every time, first by not understanding the principles you preach (entropy or cause and effect) and secondly for assuming a lot of stuff all the time just like you are against methods of dating because we can't know whether radioactive decay has always been constant we also can't know if everything always had a cause and we can't certainly know, at least right now, what the first cause of the universe is, scientific research suggests it's the big bang not god.

The reason there might not be a "God" theory is, at the time scientific theories started to come into being, most people understood that God exists. Science theories were developed by radical scientists who wanted to prove anything other than the existence of God, including that God does NOT exist. So, you might say that theories like Big Bang are theories against the existence of God.

By attempting to stretch theories about entropy and cause and effect into laws that destroy the ways that entropy and cause and effect exist, science is simply making more theories. Entropy and C&E laws exist as laws differently than the theories about them. You are constantly trying to apply theoretical stuff in ways different than the laws state. You will always fail at this, even though you say that you aren't failing. Of course, when you can prove that they exist differently than the laws currently state, then the laws will be changed.

''most people understood that God exists.'' You mean most people believed in god for no reason. That has nothing to do with scientists, there is no scientific theory about god because god is not real. There is nothing to test the existence of god, that's why no one has proved god scientifically, well you think you have but in real life no one has.

''So, you might say that theories like Big Bang are theories against the existence of God.'' No I might not, big bang theory exists because it does, there is evidence for it and it wasn't fabricated with the intent to disprove god.

As I said, there is no science on god, god is simply blind faith.

[BADecker]

If bible, koran, torah and other holy scriptures are wrong this will not prove that there is no God. If there is a God there is no way we can prove his existence if he don't want to. Our civilization is still very young, still many things we cannot explained.

As was said directly above your post, God made science to prove his existence. Actually, He made science so we could prove His existence to ourselves.

All the holy books in the world might be wrong, but science still proves God's existence.

Science can't really prove anything. All of science is based on statistics and not on immutable facts. All of science is circular as well, so it's not really possible to prove anything in the strictest sense of the word. That also means that there very well might not be anything that requires any proof and that people who chase such are just enjoying their time on earth by making up statements that they feel need to be proven (or not).

There is no way to prove that there is any Internet, that we are posting on Bitcointalk, that we exist, etc.  We can't even prove whether or not we are a figment of our own imagination.

However, in the common, standard scientific understanding of things, we can scientifically prove that God exists.

Yet there is no such thing as a ''god theory'' or anything even close to that in the whole scientific community. You are the only one claiming you can prove god and you have failed every time, first by not understanding the principles you preach (entropy or cause and effect) and secondly for assuming a lot of stuff all the time just like you are against methods of dating because we can't know whether radioactive decay has always been constant we also can't know if everything always had a cause and we can't certainly know, at least right now, what the first cause of the universe is, scientific research suggests it's the big bang not god.

The reason there might not be a "God" theory is, at the time scientific theories started to come into being, most people understood that God exists. Science theories were developed by radical scientists who wanted to prove anything other than the existence of God, including that God does NOT exist. So, you might say that theories like Big Bang are theories against the existence of God.

By attempting to stretch theories about entropy and cause and effect into laws that destroy the ways that entropy and cause and effect exist, science is simply making more theories. Entropy and C&E laws exist as laws differently than the theories about them. You are constantly trying to apply theoretical stuff in ways different than the laws state. You will always fail at this, even though you say that you aren't failing. Of course, when you can prove that they exist differently than the laws currently state, then the laws will be changed.

''most people understood that God exists.'' You mean most people believed in god for no reason. That has nothing to do with scientists, there is no scientific theory about god because god is not real. There is nothing to test the existence of god, that's why no one has proved god scientifically, well you think you have but in real life no one has.

''So, you might say that theories like Big Bang are theories against the existence of God.'' No I might not, big bang theory exists because it does, there is evidence for it and it wasn't fabricated with the intent to disprove god.

As I said, there is no science on god, god is simply blind faith.

Big Bang is a nice little theory all by itself. But it doesn't fit reality because it leaves out all kinds of things like life and intelligence and emotion, etc.  So, it will always remain a theory until it is dropped, after people get sick of it bouncing uselessly around in their text books.

The science laws of entropy, cause and effect, and complexity will remain, and continue to prove the existence of God, long after the theories about why these laws exist fade away just like BB theory will.

[Astargath]

If bible, koran, torah and other holy scriptures are wrong this will not prove that there is no God. If there is a God there is no way we can prove his existence if he don't want to. Our civilization is still very young, still many things we cannot explained.

As was said directly above your post, God made science to prove his existence. Actually, He made science so we could prove His existence to ourselves.

All the holy books in the world might be wrong, but science still proves God's existence.

Science can't really prove anything. All of science is based on statistics and not on immutable facts. All of science is circular as well, so it's not really possible to prove anything in the strictest sense of the word. That also means that there very well might not be anything that requires any proof and that people who chase such are just enjoying their time on earth by making up statements that they feel need to be proven (or not).

There is no way to prove that there is any Internet, that we are posting on Bitcointalk, that we exist, etc.  We can't even prove whether or not we are a figment of our own imagination.

However, in the common, standard scientific understanding of things, we can scientifically prove that God exists.

Yet there is no such thing as a ''god theory'' or anything even close to that in the whole scientific community. You are the only one claiming you can prove god and you have failed every time, first by not understanding the principles you preach (entropy or cause and effect) and secondly for assuming a lot of stuff all the time just like you are against methods of dating because we can't know whether radioactive decay has always been constant we also can't know if everything always had a cause and we can't certainly know, at least right now, what the first cause of the universe is, scientific research suggests it's the big bang not god.

The reason there might not be a "God" theory is, at the time scientific theories started to come into being, most people understood that God exists. Science theories were developed by radical scientists who wanted to prove anything other than the existence of God, including that God does NOT exist. So, you might say that theories like Big Bang are theories against the existence of God.

By attempting to stretch theories about entropy and cause and effect into laws that destroy the ways that entropy and cause and effect exist, science is simply making more theories. Entropy and C&E laws exist as laws differently than the theories about them. You are constantly trying to apply theoretical stuff in ways different than the laws state. You will always fail at this, even though you say that you aren't failing. Of course, when you can prove that they exist differently than the laws currently state, then the laws will be changed.

''most people understood that God exists.'' You mean most people believed in god for no reason. That has nothing to do with scientists, there is no scientific theory about god because god is not real. There is nothing to test the existence of god, that's why no one has proved god scientifically, well you think you have but in real life no one has.

''So, you might say that theories like Big Bang are theories against the existence of God.'' No I might not, big bang theory exists because it does, there is evidence for it and it wasn't fabricated with the intent to disprove god.

As I said, there is no science on god, god is simply blind faith.

Big Bang is a nice little theory all by itself. But it doesn't fit reality because it leaves out all kinds of things like life and intelligence and emotion, etc.  So, it will always remain a theory until it is dropped, after people get sick of it bouncing uselessly around in their text books.

The science laws of entropy, cause and effect, and complexity will remain, and continue to prove the existence of God, long after the theories about why these laws exist fade away just like BB theory will.

No it doesn't. You are the one saying that life and intelligence could not have originated by something other than a god but there is no evidence for that, life could have originated without a higher being intervening, you still miss evidence.