Scientific proof that God exists?

[Astargath]

1) Everything has a cause. = Truth.

2) The Universe began to exist. = Truth.

3) Therefore, the Universe has a cause. = Truth. (except, maybe, the "therefore" part)

4) Conclusion: Therefore the cause behind the existence of the Universe was God = Truth. (except, maybe, the "therefore" part)

Can god create something from nothing?

[1714512329]

1714512329

[1714512329]

1714512329

[1714512329]

1714512329

[1714512329]

1714512329

[im_not_dazzled]

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


101 Proofs For God

A growing list of common sense Proofs for God.

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

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

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

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

There are many who believe in God, but for me God is not real because there is no practical scientific evidence that I believe that God exists.

[7h3darksid3]

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


101 Proofs For God

A growing list of common sense Proofs for God.

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

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

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

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

God exists only in our souls, there are many who believe that there is a god, for me it is not, I only believe in science, if science proves that God exists, then I will believe in it

[Flying Hellfish]

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


101 Proofs For God

A growing list of common sense Proofs for God.

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

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

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

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

God exists only in our souls, there are many who believe that there is a god, for me it is not, I only believe in science, if science proves that God exists, then I will believe in it

You and several billion other people!!!

BADecker likes to make things up and pass them off as real!

[cnorthime]

Personally I have never seen such proofs or any other so I think there is no god!

[OrganicCoin]

there, you talk about god, I say god exists, and that is to my knowledge.

This is good, that people realize for one reason or another, that God exists.

Scientifically minded people have simply attempted to prove that God doesn't exist, through science. Often they don't realize that their science doesn't go far enough. That's why they think science has proven that God doesn't exist.

Keep up the good work, and remain in your faith. But if you can, please find some science that shows scientifically that God exists.

Well I think this is a big misunderstanding. Almost no one in science is actively trying to prove that God does not exist. The problem is that we know so much about the world already and have a very comprehensive theory of it and there is not God needed in these models. Which means even the God of the gaps can only be some god, quite different from what people think of, when they think of God.

Scientific theories is an important point. Scientific theories have little strength regarding what exists. They are only there to put forth ideas. The reason that they are not important regarding reality is, opposing theories can be made. In fact, this happens all the time.

If somebody wanted to make a literal scientific theory regarding God, that theory would destroy a whole bunch of other scientific theories, because it could be made to be way more logical. How? Anything that we didn't have an answer for could be attributed to God. A good portion of the reason why we have scientific theories is to get rid of God in our thinking, whether or not He is real.

I disagree with that for the following reasons:
Scientific theories do describe what exists so they have a very strong relation to reality. The important point is, that they describe observations and do not explain them in a sense that they answer "why" things are as they are.
A scientific theory of God is not really possible so far, since there are no observations that could be attributed to a God and since scientific theories do describe observations it is not really possible to make a scientific model of God. However, it is possible to point out where scientific knowledge opposes biblical or other religious viewpoints.

[ladner]

I believe that god exsists and he protect us to desctruction.

[riskipongki]

YES, GOD IS IT, MY PEOPLE MUSLIMS, AND I KNOW THE LORD IS THERE.

[ninusch5]

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


101 Proofs For God

A growing list of common sense Proofs for God.

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

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

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

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

The existence of God is an incredible thing, but in every human being we have gods, God always watches us everywhere, always watching what we do and are wrong. No, I think being punished by God is real...

[BADecker]

Watch the scientists prove that the things of nature are machines. Machines have makers. God is the Maker of all things.

Progress to scalable Molecular Machines

This molecular robot can be programmed to stereoselectively produce, in a sequential one-pot operation, an excess of any one of four possible diastereoisomers from the addition of a thiol and an alkene to an α,β-unsaturated aldehyde in a tandem reaction process. The stereodivergent synthesis includes diastereoisomers that cannot be selectively synthesized through conventional iminium–enamine organocatalysis. They anticipate that future generations of programmable molecular machines may have significant roles in chemical synthesis and molecular manufacturing.

Depending on which side the substrate is held for each reaction, a different stereoisomer of the product is formed. The reaction sequences are carried out in one pot and the robot can be programmed to produce selectively each isomer of the product by controlling the switch-state prior to each reaction of the substrate. Each molecular robot manipulates a single substrate molecule, but the process is massively paralleled with more than a million trillion molecular robots operated simultaneously by the scientists.

Read more at https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/12/progress-to-scalable-molecular-machines.html.

[Astargath]

Watch the scientists prove that the things of nature are machines. Machines have makers. God is the Maker of all things.

Progress to scalable Molecular Machines

This molecular robot can be programmed to stereoselectively produce, in a sequential one-pot operation, an excess of any one of four possible diastereoisomers from the addition of a thiol and an alkene to an α,β-unsaturated aldehyde in a tandem reaction process. The stereodivergent synthesis includes diastereoisomers that cannot be selectively synthesized through conventional iminium–enamine organocatalysis. They anticipate that future generations of programmable molecular machines may have significant roles in chemical synthesis and molecular manufacturing.

Depending on which side the substrate is held for each reaction, a different stereoisomer of the product is formed. The reaction sequences are carried out in one pot and the robot can be programmed to produce selectively each isomer of the product by controlling the switch-state prior to each reaction of the substrate. Each molecular robot manipulates a single substrate molecule, but the process is massively paralleled with more than a million trillion molecular robots operated simultaneously by the scientists.

Read more at https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/12/progress-to-scalable-molecular-machines.html.

But you never proved machines have makers, you can only prove that human made machines have human makers.

[BADecker]

Watch the scientists prove that the things of nature are machines. Machines have makers. God is the Maker of all things.

Progress to scalable Molecular Machines

This molecular robot can be programmed to stereoselectively produce, in a sequential one-pot operation, an excess of any one of four possible diastereoisomers from the addition of a thiol and an alkene to an α,β-unsaturated aldehyde in a tandem reaction process. The stereodivergent synthesis includes diastereoisomers that cannot be selectively synthesized through conventional iminium–enamine organocatalysis. They anticipate that future generations of programmable molecular machines may have significant roles in chemical synthesis and molecular manufacturing.

Depending on which side the substrate is held for each reaction, a different stereoisomer of the product is formed. The reaction sequences are carried out in one pot and the robot can be programmed to produce selectively each isomer of the product by controlling the switch-state prior to each reaction of the substrate. Each molecular robot manipulates a single substrate molecule, but the process is massively paralleled with more than a million trillion molecular robots operated simultaneously by the scientists.

Read more at https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/12/progress-to-scalable-molecular-machines.html.

But you never proved machines have makers, you can only prove that human made machines have human makers.

Should I do that for you, now? Will you be able to take it?

Scientific topic, so, scientific proof, stated in the topic title.

Machines that have makers - millions.
Machines that don't have makers - unknown.

Millions:0

Scientifically proven.

Religion proven? - who knows?

Layman proven? - who knows?

Scientifically proven? - yes.

[Astargath]

Watch the scientists prove that the things of nature are machines. Machines have makers. God is the Maker of all things.

Progress to scalable Molecular Machines

This molecular robot can be programmed to stereoselectively produce, in a sequential one-pot operation, an excess of any one of four possible diastereoisomers from the addition of a thiol and an alkene to an α,β-unsaturated aldehyde in a tandem reaction process. The stereodivergent synthesis includes diastereoisomers that cannot be selectively synthesized through conventional iminium–enamine organocatalysis. They anticipate that future generations of programmable molecular machines may have significant roles in chemical synthesis and molecular manufacturing.

Depending on which side the substrate is held for each reaction, a different stereoisomer of the product is formed. The reaction sequences are carried out in one pot and the robot can be programmed to produce selectively each isomer of the product by controlling the switch-state prior to each reaction of the substrate. Each molecular robot manipulates a single substrate molecule, but the process is massively paralleled with more than a million trillion molecular robots operated simultaneously by the scientists.

Read more at https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/12/progress-to-scalable-molecular-machines.html.

But you never proved machines have makers, you can only prove that human made machines have human makers.

Should I do that for you, now? Will you be able to take it?

Scientific topic, so, scientific proof, stated in the topic title.

Machines that have makers - millions.
Machines that don't have makers - unknown.

Millions:0

Scientifically proven.

Religion proven? - who knows?

Layman proven? - who knows?

Scientifically proven? - yes.

'' Machines that have makers - millions. ''

No, machines that have human makers - millions

Machines that don't have human makers and have others - unknown

[Keep22]

*snort*

[BADecker]

Watch the scientists prove that the things of nature are machines. Machines have makers. God is the Maker of all things.

Progress to scalable Molecular Machines

This molecular robot can be programmed to stereoselectively produce, in a sequential one-pot operation, an excess of any one of four possible diastereoisomers from the addition of a thiol and an alkene to an α,β-unsaturated aldehyde in a tandem reaction process. The stereodivergent synthesis includes diastereoisomers that cannot be selectively synthesized through conventional iminium–enamine organocatalysis. They anticipate that future generations of programmable molecular machines may have significant roles in chemical synthesis and molecular manufacturing.

Depending on which side the substrate is held for each reaction, a different stereoisomer of the product is formed. The reaction sequences are carried out in one pot and the robot can be programmed to produce selectively each isomer of the product by controlling the switch-state prior to each reaction of the substrate. Each molecular robot manipulates a single substrate molecule, but the process is massively paralleled with more than a million trillion molecular robots operated simultaneously by the scientists.

Read more at https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/12/progress-to-scalable-molecular-machines.html.

But you never proved machines have makers, you can only prove that human made machines have human makers.

Should I do that for you, now? Will you be able to take it?

Scientific topic, so, scientific proof, stated in the topic title.

Machines that have makers - millions.
Machines that don't have makers - unknown.

Millions:0

Scientifically proven.

Religion proven? - who knows?

Layman proven? - who knows?

Scientifically proven? - yes.

'' Machines that have makers - millions. ''

No, machines that have human makers - millions

Machines that don't have human makers and have others - unknown

"Machines that don't have human makers and have others - unknown"

No. Machines that don't have human makers and have others - God or the angels

[Astargath]

Watch the scientists prove that the things of nature are machines. Machines have makers. God is the Maker of all things.

Progress to scalable Molecular Machines

This molecular robot can be programmed to stereoselectively produce, in a sequential one-pot operation, an excess of any one of four possible diastereoisomers from the addition of a thiol and an alkene to an α,β-unsaturated aldehyde in a tandem reaction process. The stereodivergent synthesis includes diastereoisomers that cannot be selectively synthesized through conventional iminium–enamine organocatalysis. They anticipate that future generations of programmable molecular machines may have significant roles in chemical synthesis and molecular manufacturing.

Depending on which side the substrate is held for each reaction, a different stereoisomer of the product is formed. The reaction sequences are carried out in one pot and the robot can be programmed to produce selectively each isomer of the product by controlling the switch-state prior to each reaction of the substrate. Each molecular robot manipulates a single substrate molecule, but the process is massively paralleled with more than a million trillion molecular robots operated simultaneously by the scientists.

Read more at https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/12/progress-to-scalable-molecular-machines.html.

But you never proved machines have makers, you can only prove that human made machines have human makers.

Should I do that for you, now? Will you be able to take it?

Scientific topic, so, scientific proof, stated in the topic title.

Machines that have makers - millions.
Machines that don't have makers - unknown.

Millions:0

Scientifically proven.

Religion proven? - who knows?

Layman proven? - who knows?

Scientifically proven? - yes.

'' Machines that have makers - millions. ''

No, machines that have human makers - millions

Machines that don't have human makers and have others - unknown

"Machines that don't have human makers and have others - unknown"

No. Machines that don't have human makers and have others - God or the angels

How do you know?

[BADecker]

Watch the scientists prove that the things of nature are machines. Machines have makers. God is the Maker of all things.

Progress to scalable Molecular Machines

This molecular robot can be programmed to stereoselectively produce, in a sequential one-pot operation, an excess of any one of four possible diastereoisomers from the addition of a thiol and an alkene to an α,β-unsaturated aldehyde in a tandem reaction process. The stereodivergent synthesis includes diastereoisomers that cannot be selectively synthesized through conventional iminium–enamine organocatalysis. They anticipate that future generations of programmable molecular machines may have significant roles in chemical synthesis and molecular manufacturing.

Depending on which side the substrate is held for each reaction, a different stereoisomer of the product is formed. The reaction sequences are carried out in one pot and the robot can be programmed to produce selectively each isomer of the product by controlling the switch-state prior to each reaction of the substrate. Each molecular robot manipulates a single substrate molecule, but the process is massively paralleled with more than a million trillion molecular robots operated simultaneously by the scientists.

Read more at https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/12/progress-to-scalable-molecular-machines.html.

But you never proved machines have makers, you can only prove that human made machines have human makers.

Should I do that for you, now? Will you be able to take it?

Scientific topic, so, scientific proof, stated in the topic title.

Machines that have makers - millions.
Machines that don't have makers - unknown.

Millions:0

Scientifically proven.

Religion proven? - who knows?

Layman proven? - who knows?

Scientifically proven? - yes.

'' Machines that have makers - millions. ''

No, machines that have human makers - millions

Machines that don't have human makers and have others - unknown

"Machines that don't have human makers and have others - unknown"

No. Machines that don't have human makers and have others - God or the angels

How do you know?

How many times do we have to do this? Simply because of the greatness of the universe, the maker of it fits the definition of "God."

[Astargath]

Watch the scientists prove that the things of nature are machines. Machines have makers. God is the Maker of all things.

Progress to scalable Molecular Machines

This molecular robot can be programmed to stereoselectively produce, in a sequential one-pot operation, an excess of any one of four possible diastereoisomers from the addition of a thiol and an alkene to an α,β-unsaturated aldehyde in a tandem reaction process. The stereodivergent synthesis includes diastereoisomers that cannot be selectively synthesized through conventional iminium–enamine organocatalysis. They anticipate that future generations of programmable molecular machines may have significant roles in chemical synthesis and molecular manufacturing.

Depending on which side the substrate is held for each reaction, a different stereoisomer of the product is formed. The reaction sequences are carried out in one pot and the robot can be programmed to produce selectively each isomer of the product by controlling the switch-state prior to each reaction of the substrate. Each molecular robot manipulates a single substrate molecule, but the process is massively paralleled with more than a million trillion molecular robots operated simultaneously by the scientists.

Read more at https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/12/progress-to-scalable-molecular-machines.html.

But you never proved machines have makers, you can only prove that human made machines have human makers.

Should I do that for you, now? Will you be able to take it?

Scientific topic, so, scientific proof, stated in the topic title.

Machines that have makers - millions.
Machines that don't have makers - unknown.

Millions:0

Scientifically proven.

Religion proven? - who knows?

Layman proven? - who knows?

Scientifically proven? - yes.

'' Machines that have makers - millions. ''

No, machines that have human makers - millions

Machines that don't have human makers and have others - unknown

"Machines that don't have human makers and have others - unknown"

No. Machines that don't have human makers and have others - God or the angels

How do you know?

How many times do we have to do this? Simply because of the greatness of the universe, the maker of it fits the definition of "God."

The greatness of the universe doesn't prove that it is designed, complexity does not imply design. There are thousands of complex, functional things that are not designed. Many would argue that if a god designed the universe he did a pretty poor job. Why would a God who is OMNIBENEVOLENT (all loving) and OMNIPOTENT (all powerful) make a world with volcanoes and earthquakes etc.?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_poor_design#In_humans
In short, there are too many mistakes and flaws to consider that a ''god'' created the universe.

[BADecker]

Watch the scientists prove that the things of nature are machines. Machines have makers. God is the Maker of all things.

Progress to scalable Molecular Machines

This molecular robot can be programmed to stereoselectively produce, in a sequential one-pot operation, an excess of any one of four possible diastereoisomers from the addition of a thiol and an alkene to an α,β-unsaturated aldehyde in a tandem reaction process. The stereodivergent synthesis includes diastereoisomers that cannot be selectively synthesized through conventional iminium–enamine organocatalysis. They anticipate that future generations of programmable molecular machines may have significant roles in chemical synthesis and molecular manufacturing.

Depending on which side the substrate is held for each reaction, a different stereoisomer of the product is formed. The reaction sequences are carried out in one pot and the robot can be programmed to produce selectively each isomer of the product by controlling the switch-state prior to each reaction of the substrate. Each molecular robot manipulates a single substrate molecule, but the process is massively paralleled with more than a million trillion molecular robots operated simultaneously by the scientists.

Read more at https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/12/progress-to-scalable-molecular-machines.html.

But you never proved machines have makers, you can only prove that human made machines have human makers.

Should I do that for you, now? Will you be able to take it?

Scientific topic, so, scientific proof, stated in the topic title.

Machines that have makers - millions.
Machines that don't have makers - unknown.

Millions:0

Scientifically proven.

Religion proven? - who knows?

Layman proven? - who knows?

Scientifically proven? - yes.

'' Machines that have makers - millions. ''

No, machines that have human makers - millions

Machines that don't have human makers and have others - unknown

"Machines that don't have human makers and have others - unknown"

No. Machines that don't have human makers and have others - God or the angels

How do you know?

How many times do we have to do this? Simply because of the greatness of the universe, the maker of it fits the definition of "God."

The greatness of the universe doesn't prove that it is designed, complexity does not imply design. There are thousands of complex, functional things that are not designed. Many would argue that if a god designed the universe he did a pretty poor job. Why would a God who is OMNIBENEVOLENT (all loving) and OMNIPOTENT (all powerful) make a world with volcanoes and earthquakes etc.?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_poor_design#In_humans
In short, there are too many mistakes and flaws to consider that a ''god'' created the universe.

The universe runs like a "well-oiled" machine. It was designed, and designed extremely well.

[Mrphils]

Indirectly, they do