Scientific proof that God exists?

[Wong owah]

God indeed exists, there is already a miracle that exists in this world

[1714690598]

1714690598

[1714690598]

1714690598

[1714690598]

1714690598

[BADecker]

With due respect and recognition to the scientist Charles Darwin for his works and theory, I would say he really did a good job. But as of now I really believe that the theory about evolution had something missing. I am confused why we still have seen monkeys? Why is it that people are not looking like monkeys or monkeys looking to evolve more like to become human. How many years have we been with these animals and why are they still the same? Or why are we still the same. I think the proofs mentioned could be more interesting since we are talking more about genes.

I think you are confused about what thread you are in. If you really have those questions, why don't you just google it? It takes you 20 seconds to google ''why are there still monkeys if we evolved'' which is by the way one of the stupidest arguments ''against evolution''.

That's the point. None of the explanations are anywhere near conclusive. They are all ideas. Some of them seem logical on the surface. But none of them are logical enough to answer the question. Most of them use explanations full of assumptions that bring up more questions than they could ever hope to answer. The reason for this is that evolution is a hoax.

There are only two answers about where life and everything came from. The first is God, taken from eye witness accounts that go back to the beginning. This isn't proof. But it is eye witnesses.

The other is evolution. But evolution is just a story that has many holes in it. All but a very few of the holes are anything more than simple stories that many people have joined over time, but no proof.

We have eye witness reports, and stories that don't make sense because they don't fit reality.

dude how can it be you are so smart, yet deny the most obvious evidence about evolution?
Me thinks its because you simply are in denial.  Don't be afraid of the truth dude. Stop preaching about your stupid invisible sky fairy, ffs

What? I have never preached about any sky fairy. Neither have I denied evidence. When are you going to realize that the evidence for evolution fits adaptation better? Evolution is simply a story.

 no wonder you think that simply because you might be able to out talk someone, is the reason that you are correct.

good lord!!!  like you haven't been doing just that in this thread for what...4 years or so now?....

We are all guilty of continuing it as well.  We all know he is wrong - why do we continue to entertain him?

well sometimes when I've had a few, I just can't help myself... my bad... LOL

Thank you. I have out-talked you. But, that doesn't make me wrong.

Evidence of adaptation rather than evolution, and scientific proof for God, are essentially self evident in science. That's why evolutionists don't talk about it. They are trying to formulate something other than the truth.

[Kingkong27]

Sensitive topic to talk about god..yes we all know that the earth doesn have prove yet that god is really exist...but for me we all have our own god so keep believing.

[Astargath]

Badecker it really is pointless trying to reason with you. Your delusions are irreversible. Wrong and irreversible.

And how dare you include me in your religious delusion.

I refute, refuse and spit on your so called authority over me....your god does not own me cos your silly book of old toilet paper says so. I could also write on a paper napkin that the Flying Spaghetti Monster owns everything in the universe. Its written...therefore it must be true.......There, you now belong to Him.

And once again you are arguing from a fallacy : https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

You want to see your god in everything...fine, go right ahead. But leave other people out of your delusions.

My delusions might be wrong and irreversible, but the fact that science proves that God exists isn't one of them.

The fact that God exists isn't religion. Religion is something that we don't really know, but have to take on faith or trust. Since I know that God exists, scientifically, it is you who are including yourself in potential non-facts, which you call a religion because you don't understand the science involved. So it isn't my religion. It's yours.

My authority over you is close to nothing. If you spit on it, and refuse it, then you must be accepting, or at least inviting, greater authority over you.

My God is the God of the universe. Are you trying to push yourself out of the universe? Just because you don't know that He owns you, doesn't mean He doesn't.

Just because you write on a napkin "the Flying Spaghetti Monster owns everything in the universe. Its written...therefore it must be true," doesn't mean that it is true. For example. You might think that you know that Big Bang is real. But if you don't understand BB math, you really only believe, and BB is really only a religion for you. Someone else who knows the math might know that BB could actually be real.

The point is, you are talking religion in this science thread.

You keep claiming that science proves god exists yet I have never seen a scientific theory, hypothesis or anything related to ''god'', have you? How come we have so many fake (as you claim) scientific theories like evolution with a ton of evidence behind it and yet not a single one for god, seems strange to me.

That's because we are at the conclusion of the proof. The evidence is so exceedingly overwhelming in C&E, entropy, and complexity, that you might as well waste time on formulating hypotheses and theories about it. Go ahead if you want.

If it's so exceedingly overwhelming, as you claim, again, why is there no scientific theory? Oh, because it's a waste of time, give me a break with your stupid excuses. How come we have a scientific theory for evolution then? Gravity? Oh yeah, scientists couldn't bother to make one for god, right? Who cares about a supernatural god that created the universe, am I right? They just didn't bother, that's what you are saying. You are a fucking joke lol.

LOL! See how well cause and effect works? You posted your post using all kinds of cause and effect operations, from your brain dictating what your fingers do at the keyboard, all the way up to the C&E flow of training that trained your brain to think of what to cause your fingers to type.

Thanks for asking a bunch of easy-to-answer questions.

BTW, when you have such an abundance of proof for the existence of God, like the scientists do, why would they want to make a theory for God? You ask such simplistic questions.

So let me understand it, you claim the evidence is so obvious, so extremely obvious that scientists don't even need to apply the scientific method to it? https://www.compellingtruth.org/scientists-believe-God.html
http://www.pewforum.org/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/

Interestingly, although some scientists do believe in god, there is a very significant difference on the percentage of scientists that believe in god vs the percentage of other people. ''specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God'' ''By contrast, 95% of Americans believe in some form of deity or higher power'' Are you saying that the average americans are smarter than scientists hahaha, how is it possible that scientists believe less when there is such clear and obvious evidence out there?

[belphegory]

Why are you focusing on my delusions? You know nothing about them. And, they aren't part of this thread.

Because your delusions are what you are basing your reasoning, your belief and your entire argument in this thread on. So it most certainly is part of this thread.

That's the point, and I explained it already. Your belief against something doesn't make your belief true. Again, the example is your belief in Big Bang. You believe it is true because your want to, or because you like believing other people who say it is true. You don't know BB is true because you don't understand the math. Believing it doesn't make it true.

I'm so glad you seem to be understanding where I'm coming from....you just need to turn Big Bang into god and you have my point of view!

Same with the scientific proof for the existence of God. If you don't understand the proof - be it for or against - all you have is a belief.

You seem to be missing the point....again. Take off the god coloured glasses for just a teeny bit....and see the bigger picture.

It seems that you and Astargath don't understand the proof for the existence of God, because you don't understand your own proof against the existence of God enough to explain it. Both of you are entirely talking religion. So, it is religion for you, but for those who understand, it is knowledge.

That statement is so full of contradictions, I'm not even sure where to start.....Ok here goes:
1. We are saying there IS no proof. None. Zip. Zero. Nada. We are saying we can't understand it because there just is none. At all..... Like none to be found.
2. 'because you don't understand your own proof against the existence of God enough to explain it' We don't try to claim any such thing because THERE IS NO GOD.
3. So because we are saying there is none....we are NOT taking it on faith because evidence to support such a claim is not....and has not to date.....ever been brought forward in the history of human civilisation.
4. "To those that understand, it is knowledge" Again you are talking about people having faith...to believe in an invisible sky daddy watching over you 24/7.

No. It is your beliefs, because you are the one talking about belief without showing proof for what you say.

I don't have to show proof for anything my friend.....the burden of proof is all on you religious nutjobs.

You have just admitted that having religion means that you don't know....but yet are stating....(as a fact that cannot be verified by anyone else) that YOU know god exists....and scientifically at that...wow did you find something that can be proven, demonstrable, quantifiable, testable and repeatable that thousands of other scientific people have somehow missed???

How do you know that it has not been verified by anyone else? Before the apple hit Isaac Newton on the head, there might not have been any theories for gravity. If Newton was the first, he was the first. There has to be a first, if it exists.

Yawn....Argument for First Cause Fallacy....again. If it was verified by anyone....it would be world wide news...it would be in every scientific magazine around the globe.....which it is not.

What does having a religion or not, have to do with the fact that God exists?

The very definition of religion:
Definition of religion - the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
Source: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/religion

It is simply a religion for you due to your unwillingness or inability to understand the proof. Since I understand the proof, and can explain it, and have explained it, it is not a religion for me. Just because I have certain religious beliefs, does not mean that they include the things I have factual knowledge of. Same for you.

Wow its like talking to a sun baked brick....I might actually get better answers out of it. YOUR opinions and YOUR beliefs have shaped how you responding to my queries. YOU are claiming to understand the proof, have the proof...and claim its factual knowledge. Lets put this in terms a 5 year old could understand cos clearly its going right over your head:
WE are stating that YOUR opinions about claiming to have factual knowledge of proof is bull crap. A big steaming...pile of bull crap! There is no proof because there is no god. Simple enough?

Faith is all inclusive, because we all live by faith. This means we all have religion.

I totally understand why a religious person would say that. Because for you, faith = religion.
This is what I am trying to get into your head......Non religious based people are not. Faith does not equal religion for me. I have faith the sun will come up tomorrow...and I'm aware that science has proven that we are on a planet turning around the sun and it will rise tomorrow and its based on fact. Hard proven fact that can be looked up. I'm just too lazy to actually go and find the actual hard evidence. But it's there....unlike the evidence for your god.

Science theory and hypotheses are not always facts. So science is not always facts.

Yes, that is true, and science is always happy to revise its theories when proven wrong....unlike religion.

There are formal religions that do not include a being to be worshiped. Buddhism is one example.

Yes, but they are not claiming to have factual knowledge of their beliefs. So moving on....

Another example is the faith that we all live by all the time, as I stated in the paragraph above this one.

I have responded to that already.

LOL. People know that gravity exists because it is around them all the time. They use it everyday. Scientific theories and formulas for gravity may or may not have anything to do with the fact of gravity. Gravity, being fact, doesn't necessarily have anything to do with science. Why? Because gravity was known to exist long before science came along. When you talk about gravity here, your density is starting to match that of notbatman in the FE thread.

Right...so the vikings knew thunder and lightning existed too. They called it god.
You only know it was a fact because science has proven it. Not religion or faith. Lots of things were also known to exist long before we had science to nail down HOW and WHY of things. Thats why your god is dwindling....its the god of the gaps..and science is closing that a bit more every day.

The fact that you respond to my posts is allowing a little of my authority over you. Now you are inviting more. Why do you immerse yourself in things that you detest so much? You are submersing yourself in my authority and continuing to ask for more.

And the fact that you are responding to my posts must mean I have a little authority over you. Long as I'm wasting your time....you have less time to brainwash someone else.

Actually, this might be true. There is some interpretation of parallel universe theory that suggests that spiritually speaking, we might all be in our own universe. But that concept is way beyond anything that this forum is capable of handling, and certainly this thread.

Agreed. And I notice you didn't disagree with my description of your god. Am I finally getting through to you?

Well, do you have scientific proof for it? I mean, can you show the scientific proof? Showing it doesn't mean I will understand it. But if you literally have proof for it, the least you could do is show the proof as I have shown the proof for the existence of God.

I could happily show you the proof! Want me to post a picture?

However, BB was only an example. If there is any point in science that has been proven to you, based on someone telling it to you, or on your reading of it in a book or somewhere, without the understanding on your part of how it is a fact, then it is part of your religion... a religious belief for you... even if it is believed by millions of others, and known by still other millions.

Again its the faith = religion for science bull crap......science is NOT a religion for the umteenth time.

People at church believe the priest or minister when they are told things about the particular religion. They often don't know if what they are being told is true or not. Yet they believe (or not). If you don't have and understand the proof for things like the diameter of the sun, or the distance to Jupiter, but have only believed what others have said, then it is all religion for you, even if it is 100% true and factual.

I understand what you are saying, but just flatly disagree with it.

The scientific proof for the existence of God might not be understandable to you, just like other scientific fact might not be understandable to you. We are in a forum. So, you have the right to state that you don't believe something, even in a "proof" thread. But if you are absolutely sure, show the proof. At least Astargath attempts to show the proof that God doesn't exist a little, or that the proof that He exists is faulty. All you do is blab religion.

Awww am I irritating you? Shampies....
I don't have to prove anything. You are the one claiming to have proof. Which is bogus and has been bogus this entire time. Astargath and I are just the only ones calling you out on it , since you seem to be so desperate to negate whatever we say.

[BADecker]

Why are you focusing on my delusions? You know nothing about them. And, they aren't part of this thread.

Because your delusions are what you are basing your reasoning, your belief and your entire argument in this thread on. So it most certainly is part of this thread.

The fact that you are thinking this, is one of your delusions, but at best, a religion for you. How can we tell? Because I have shown the scientific proof for the existence of God. But you have only continued to blab that it isn't proof. You haven't been able to explain any proof against the proof for God. You are talking religion. I am talking science. Come on. Talk science in this science thread. You can't, can you? Religion is all you have.

That's the point, and I explained it already. Your belief against something doesn't make your belief true. Again, the example is your belief in Big Bang. You believe it is true because your want to, or because you like believing other people who say it is true. You don't know BB is true because you don't understand the math. Believing it doesn't make it true.

I'm so glad you seem to be understanding where I'm coming from....you just need to turn Big Bang into god and you have my point of view!

You don't seem to understand that every theory about BB is entirely inadequate to fit our universe. Why is this so? Because BB doesn't take into account more than a teensy bit of the operation of the universe. It doesn't even take into account that, even if we figured out for a fact that BB could exist, then we would still have to figure out if it was the way the universe came into being or not.

Same with the scientific proof for the existence of God. If you don't understand the proof - be it for or against - all you have is a belief.

You seem to be missing the point....again. Take off the god coloured glasses for just a teeny bit....and see the bigger picture.

There you go again, talking religion. I have scientific proof. Refute it with scientific proof. Since you can't, you are simply blabbing your religion in a science thread.

It seems that you and Astargath don't understand the proof for the existence of God, because you don't understand your own proof against the existence of God enough to explain it. Both of you are entirely talking religion. So, it is religion for you, but for those who understand, it is knowledge.

That statement is so full of contradictions, I'm not even sure where to start.....Ok here goes:
1. We are saying there IS no proof. None. Zip. Zero. Nada. We are saying we can't understand it because there just is none. At all..... Like none to be found.
2. 'because you don't understand your own proof against the existence of God enough to explain it' We don't try to claim any such thing because THERE IS NO GOD.
3. So because we are saying there is none....we are NOT taking it on faith because evidence to support such a claim is not....and has not to date.....ever been brought forward in the history of human civilisation.
4. "To those that understand, it is knowledge" Again you are talking about people having faith...to believe in an invisible sky daddy watching over you 24/7.

How do you know I don't understand what I offer as proof? When did you get into my mind to check out what my understanding is?

Since you say that there is no scientific proof for God, but don't want to even refute the proof with science, all your talk is not scientific talk, but rather religious talk.

Lots of people understand religion. If you don't have scientific proof, you have your religion, right? Show some good science to refute my science. Or, recognize your religion.

No. It is your beliefs, because you are the one talking about belief without showing proof for what you say.

I don't have to show proof for anything my friend.....the burden of proof is all on you religious nutjobs.

I showed you the scientific proof for the existence of God. You haven't shown anything but religious blab to refute my science. Come on! Show some serious science if you can.

You have just admitted that having religion means that you don't know....but yet are stating....(as a fact that cannot be verified by anyone else) that YOU know god exists....and scientifically at that...wow did you find something that can be proven, demonstrable, quantifiable, testable and repeatable that thousands of other scientific people have somehow missed???

How do you know that it has not been verified by anyone else? Before the apple hit Isaac Newton on the head, there might not have been any theories for gravity. If Newton was the first, he was the first. There has to be a first, if it exists.

Yawn....Argument for First Cause Fallacy....again. If it was verified by anyone....it would be world wide news...it would be in every scientific magazine around the globe.....which it is not.

More of your religious talk, because you can't find any science to refute the scientific proof that God exists. Actually, I kinda admire how strong your faith in your religion is.

What does having a religion or not, have to do with the fact that God exists?

The very definition of religion:
Definition of religion - the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
Source: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/religion

If you look a little closer at the Oxford definition of religion, you will see that there is more... more which expands the definition to show that your blab is religious blab. Consider the definition at http://www.dictionary.com/browse/religion?s=t to see how much you are missing in your watered down definition.

It is simply a religion for you due to your unwillingness or inability to understand the proof. Since I understand the proof, and can explain it, and have explained it, it is not a religion for me. Just because I have certain religious beliefs, does not mean that they include the things I have factual knowledge of. Same for you.

Wow its like talking to a sun baked brick....I might actually get better answers out of it. YOUR opinions and YOUR beliefs have shaped how you responding to my queries. YOU are claiming to understand the proof, have the proof...and claim its factual knowledge. Lets put this in terms a 5 year old could understand cos clearly its going right over your head:
WE are stating that YOUR opinions about claiming to have factual knowledge of proof is bull crap. A big steaming...pile of bull crap! There is no proof because there is no god. Simple enough?

There you go again, talking things that are not science about the existence of God. You're in the wrong thread.

Faith is all inclusive, because we all live by faith. This means we all have religion.

I totally understand why a religious person would say that. Because for you, faith = religion.
This is what I am trying to get into your head......Non religious based people are not. Faith does not equal religion for me. I have faith the sun will come up tomorrow...and I'm aware that science has proven that we are on a planet turning around the sun and it will rise tomorrow and its based on fact. Hard proven fact that can be looked up. I'm just too lazy to actually go and find the actual hard evidence. But it's there....unlike the evidence for your god.

A religion of non-religion is still a religion. It fits the definition of religion.

Science theory and hypotheses are not always facts. So science is not always facts.

Yes, that is true, and science is always happy to revise its theories when proven wrong....unlike religion.

Exactly what I have been trying to tell you. I have presented science. But you keep on talking religion rather than refuting my science with science. Do you even know any science at all? Or are you simply spouting what the high priests of your religion are telling you?

There are formal religions that do not include a being to be worshiped. Buddhism is one example.

Yes, but they are not claiming to have factual knowledge of their beliefs. So moving on....

Exactly. So, isn't it about time you do what you are talking about? Provide some science that God doesn't exist, rather than only religious blab. After all, I have shown the science that proves that God exists. Only if I hadn't... only then might you be able to get away with spouting religion.

Another example is the faith that we all live by all the time, as I stated in the paragraph above this one.

I have responded to that already.

So, you understand that all people live by religion, just as the definition of religion essentially states. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/religion?s=t

LOL. People know that gravity exists because it is around them all the time. They use it everyday. Scientific theories and formulas for gravity may or may not have anything to do with the fact of gravity. Gravity, being fact, doesn't necessarily have anything to do with science. Why? Because gravity was known to exist long before science came along. When you talk about gravity here, your density is starting to match that of notbatman in the FE thread.

Right...so the vikings knew thunder and lightning existed too. They called it god.
You only know it was a fact because science has proven it. Not religion or faith. Lots of things were also known to exist long before we had science to nail down HOW and WHY of things. Thats why your god is dwindling....its the god of the gaps..and science is closing that a bit more every day.

Wow! That's the closest you have come to stating that the things you are saying are religion. And no. The fact of lightening and thunder existed long before science. God isn't dwindling. What is dwindling is the ability of people like you to refute science fact in a scientific way. All you are speaking is religion, so far. You haven't shown any science at all (almost).

The fact that you respond to my posts is allowing a little of my authority over you. Now you are inviting more. Why do you immerse yourself in things that you detest so much? You are submersing yourself in my authority and continuing to ask for more.

And the fact that you are responding to my posts must mean I have a little authority over you. Long as I'm wasting your time....you have less time to brainwash someone else.

But my science is overcoming your religion with fact rather than mere blab like you are using.

Actually, this might be true. There is some interpretation of parallel universe theory that suggests that spiritually speaking, we might all be in our own universe. But that concept is way beyond anything that this forum is capable of handling, and certainly this thread.

Agreed. And I notice you didn't disagree with my description of your god. Am I finally getting through to you?

Your description of God is irrelevant. It is a religious description. It has nothing to do with this thread. Why should I refute it when you are attempting to convince us that you don't even believe in the existence of God?

Well, do you have scientific proof for it? I mean, can you show the scientific proof? Showing it doesn't mean I will understand it. But if you literally have proof for it, the least you could do is show the proof as I have shown the proof for the existence of God.

I could happily show you the proof! Want me to post a picture?

Next you will start to post videos. Yo are getting more like notbatman all the time.

However, BB was only an example. If there is any point in science that has been proven to you, based on someone telling it to you, or on your reading of it in a book or somewhere, without the understanding on your part of how it is a fact, then it is part of your religion... a religious belief for you... even if it is believed by millions of others, and known by still other millions.

Again its the faith = religion for science bull crap......science is NOT a religion for the umteenth time.

Science is not a religion. But you are not showing science. I am. So, you are the one using religion, not me.

People at church believe the priest or minister when they are told things about the particular religion. They often don't know if what they are being told is true or not. Yet they believe (or not). If you don't have and understand the proof for things like the diameter of the sun, or the distance to Jupiter, but have only believed what others have said, then it is all religion for you, even if it is 100% true and factual.

I understand what you are saying, but just flatly disagree with it.

Science is based on knowledge. If you want to believe that a bunch of people have the knowledge, then believing them is religion or like it.

I can understand how you might have religion regarding the science behind God's existence. After all, there are many scientific proofs that seem to contradict. You can say that you believe this on or that, or you can say you don't believe any of them. But if you don't have the knowledge through scientific proof, then you have religious belief.

The scientific proof for the existence of God might not be understandable to you, just like other scientific fact might not be understandable to you. We are in a forum. So, you have the right to state that you don't believe something, even in a "proof" thread. But if you are absolutely sure, show the proof. At least Astargath attempts to show the proof that God doesn't exist a little, or that the proof that He exists is faulty. All you do is blab religion.

Awww am I irritating you? Shampies....
I don't have to prove anything. You are the one claiming to have proof. Which is bogus and has been bogus this entire time. Astargath and I are just the only ones calling you out on it , since you seem to be so desperate to negate whatever we say.

Right. You don't have to prove anything. It doesn't bother me that you like to blab. But if we are going to talk the scientific proof, for or against, then we have to talk scientific proof.

If the only reason you are in this science thread is to spout off about your religion, great. It's up to the moderators to do the judging. So far, this is all that it seems that you want to do... talk religion.

[BADecker]

Badecker it really is pointless trying to reason with you. Your delusions are irreversible. Wrong and irreversible.

And how dare you include me in your religious delusion.

I refute, refuse and spit on your so called authority over me....your god does not own me cos your silly book of old toilet paper says so. I could also write on a paper napkin that the Flying Spaghetti Monster owns everything in the universe. Its written...therefore it must be true.......There, you now belong to Him.

And once again you are arguing from a fallacy : https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

You want to see your god in everything...fine, go right ahead. But leave other people out of your delusions.

My delusions might be wrong and irreversible, but the fact that science proves that God exists isn't one of them.

The fact that God exists isn't religion. Religion is something that we don't really know, but have to take on faith or trust. Since I know that God exists, scientifically, it is you who are including yourself in potential non-facts, which you call a religion because you don't understand the science involved. So it isn't my religion. It's yours.

My authority over you is close to nothing. If you spit on it, and refuse it, then you must be accepting, or at least inviting, greater authority over you.

My God is the God of the universe. Are you trying to push yourself out of the universe? Just because you don't know that He owns you, doesn't mean He doesn't.

Just because you write on a napkin "the Flying Spaghetti Monster owns everything in the universe. Its written...therefore it must be true," doesn't mean that it is true. For example. You might think that you know that Big Bang is real. But if you don't understand BB math, you really only believe, and BB is really only a religion for you. Someone else who knows the math might know that BB could actually be real.

The point is, you are talking religion in this science thread.

You keep claiming that science proves god exists yet I have never seen a scientific theory, hypothesis or anything related to ''god'', have you? How come we have so many fake (as you claim) scientific theories like evolution with a ton of evidence behind it and yet not a single one for god, seems strange to me.

That's because we are at the conclusion of the proof. The evidence is so exceedingly overwhelming in C&E, entropy, and complexity, that you might as well waste time on formulating hypotheses and theories about it. Go ahead if you want.

If it's so exceedingly overwhelming, as you claim, again, why is there no scientific theory? Oh, because it's a waste of time, give me a break with your stupid excuses. How come we have a scientific theory for evolution then? Gravity? Oh yeah, scientists couldn't bother to make one for god, right? Who cares about a supernatural god that created the universe, am I right? They just didn't bother, that's what you are saying. You are a fucking joke lol.

LOL! See how well cause and effect works? You posted your post using all kinds of cause and effect operations, from your brain dictating what your fingers do at the keyboard, all the way up to the C&E flow of training that trained your brain to think of what to cause your fingers to type.

Thanks for asking a bunch of easy-to-answer questions.

BTW, when you have such an abundance of proof for the existence of God, like the scientists do, why would they want to make a theory for God? You ask such simplistic questions.

So let me understand it, you claim the evidence is so obvious, so extremely obvious that scientists don't even need to apply the scientific method to it? https://www.compellingtruth.org/scientists-believe-God.html
http://www.pewforum.org/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/

So, what's your point? You show some religious points about scientists. So what?

Interestingly, although some scientists do believe in god, there is a very significant difference on the percentage of scientists that believe in god vs the percentage of other people. ''specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God'' ''By contrast, 95% of Americans believe in some form of deity or higher power'' Are you saying that the average americans are smarter than scientists hahaha, how is it possible that scientists believe less when there is such clear and obvious evidence out there?

Note that scientists have a reason for believing in God. It's because it is their religion.

Scientific proof for the existence of God is something that scientists use all the time in their scientific investigations, even though they don't realize they are doing it.
All scientists know that they are using cause and effect in their science.
They are all aware of degradation of their scientific operations... entropy.
They are all aware of complexity of atoms and molecules in even the simplest of their science projects.
They all use the above-listed scientific proof for the existence of God even though they don't realize that they are doing so.

Why would an average non-scientist American want to worship God like a dumb scientist who uses the proof for the existence of God, but can't even figure out that he is doing it?

You can't seem to talk science. Even your links are religious. You are in the wrong thread.

[sirazimuth]

You can't seem to talk science. Even your links are religious. You are in the wrong thread.

dude, quite frankly, I think you maybe are in the wrong thread.
Why don't you go spout your "scientific proof for god's existence blah blah blah"  ..,."cause, effect blah blah blah" crap you've been repeating obsessively in here
for past 4 years, in a real science forum thread where your audience might be a tad more educated on the subject.
After all, you got your links there all ready, (that you've posted like ten million times in here.)
You never know, you might get educated. (I'm not holding my breath tho...)
Me thinks you won't because you know you'd have your ass handed to you. (if not laughed at as just another know it all bible godswill nutjob)

[Astargath]

Badecker it really is pointless trying to reason with you. Your delusions are irreversible. Wrong and irreversible.

And how dare you include me in your religious delusion.

I refute, refuse and spit on your so called authority over me....your god does not own me cos your silly book of old toilet paper says so. I could also write on a paper napkin that the Flying Spaghetti Monster owns everything in the universe. Its written...therefore it must be true.......There, you now belong to Him.

And once again you are arguing from a fallacy : https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

You want to see your god in everything...fine, go right ahead. But leave other people out of your delusions.

My delusions might be wrong and irreversible, but the fact that science proves that God exists isn't one of them.

The fact that God exists isn't religion. Religion is something that we don't really know, but have to take on faith or trust. Since I know that God exists, scientifically, it is you who are including yourself in potential non-facts, which you call a religion because you don't understand the science involved. So it isn't my religion. It's yours.

My authority over you is close to nothing. If you spit on it, and refuse it, then you must be accepting, or at least inviting, greater authority over you.

My God is the God of the universe. Are you trying to push yourself out of the universe? Just because you don't know that He owns you, doesn't mean He doesn't.

Just because you write on a napkin "the Flying Spaghetti Monster owns everything in the universe. Its written...therefore it must be true," doesn't mean that it is true. For example. You might think that you know that Big Bang is real. But if you don't understand BB math, you really only believe, and BB is really only a religion for you. Someone else who knows the math might know that BB could actually be real.

The point is, you are talking religion in this science thread.

You keep claiming that science proves god exists yet I have never seen a scientific theory, hypothesis or anything related to ''god'', have you? How come we have so many fake (as you claim) scientific theories like evolution with a ton of evidence behind it and yet not a single one for god, seems strange to me.

That's because we are at the conclusion of the proof. The evidence is so exceedingly overwhelming in C&E, entropy, and complexity, that you might as well waste time on formulating hypotheses and theories about it. Go ahead if you want.

If it's so exceedingly overwhelming, as you claim, again, why is there no scientific theory? Oh, because it's a waste of time, give me a break with your stupid excuses. How come we have a scientific theory for evolution then? Gravity? Oh yeah, scientists couldn't bother to make one for god, right? Who cares about a supernatural god that created the universe, am I right? They just didn't bother, that's what you are saying. You are a fucking joke lol.

LOL! See how well cause and effect works? You posted your post using all kinds of cause and effect operations, from your brain dictating what your fingers do at the keyboard, all the way up to the C&E flow of training that trained your brain to think of what to cause your fingers to type.

Thanks for asking a bunch of easy-to-answer questions.

BTW, when you have such an abundance of proof for the existence of God, like the scientists do, why would they want to make a theory for God? You ask such simplistic questions.

So let me understand it, you claim the evidence is so obvious, so extremely obvious that scientists don't even need to apply the scientific method to it? https://www.compellingtruth.org/scientists-believe-God.html
http://www.pewforum.org/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/

So, what's your point? You show some religious points about scientists. So what?

Interestingly, although some scientists do believe in god, there is a very significant difference on the percentage of scientists that believe in god vs the percentage of other people. ''specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God'' ''By contrast, 95% of Americans believe in some form of deity or higher power'' Are you saying that the average americans are smarter than scientists hahaha, how is it possible that scientists believe less when there is such clear and obvious evidence out there?

Note that scientists have a reason for believing in God. It's because it is their religion.

Scientific proof for the existence of God is something that scientists use all the time in their scientific investigations, even though they don't realize they are doing it.
All scientists know that they are using cause and effect in their science.
They are all aware of degradation of their scientific operations... entropy.
They are all aware of complexity of atoms and molecules in even the simplest of their science projects.
They all use the above-listed scientific proof for the existence of God even though they don't realize that they are doing so.

Why would an average non-scientist American want to worship God like a dumb scientist who uses the proof for the existence of God, but can't even figure out that he is doing it?

You can't seem to talk science. Even your links are religious. You are in the wrong thread.

So you are smarter than most scientists, you understand the proof for god but they don't. Why not publish a paper, a scientific paper to make them understand the proof? How come the other scientists that do believe in god never published such paper? How come they didn't try to convince their partners about god using scientific proof? Seems really weird to me unless... wait for it.... there is no scientific proof for god, they know there isn't even if they believe in god and thus can't really publish a scientific paper about it or create a scientific theory. Who knows, right?

[_Gajah]

Why should there be any doubt about the existence of God? For thousands of years, people have debated whether God exists. Most conclude that God exists and can be proved by the existence of the Qur'an.
It is thought that the correct answer lies in the Quranic writings because the writing mostly has the truth until the end of the day,
If you want to know it read, because if the person reading maybe you do not believe it.

[Seron26]

I think God does not exist that is just a phenomenon without scientific explanation

[Yerre]

Sorry nothing of that is evidence. As I said itcan be explained thru evolution and biologi
A supreme being that creates universes is much more complex than anything in nature.
If a creature like that can pop up from nothing surley the universe can

[Tyose]

So many technically useless points regarding GOD.. hmm..

"Let me get this right. You're searching for scientific evidence of a hypothesis that cannot be tested. -
That's incredibly naive."

[Bunna]

I can most definatly say that I'm at a point in life where I have had reasonable time to come to the conclusion that when one comes in, one leaves this life. We can experience at any moment in time, the life of someone at the point of realising they are fucked (un-natural death). The problem is, (thankfully) we tend to concentrate on the day to day reality to understand this slightly off topic point. That 'be careful what you wish for, as a butterfly flaps it's wing's, there's a storm the other side of the world..' is (when you recognise it) actually evidence that not only can we become one with the person at the point of death, Hopefully not by choice) as we dream of the cause of death, at the point it happens. (Remix of a wee bitty hagakure..)

[Rvish]

You actually don't have any idea of what you're talking about. You really need to shut the fuck up. Like seriously.

We've simulated both the big bang and abiogenesis. Both events match up nearly perfectly with the results. I mean, no one even has to say anything about evolution, that's literally 5th grade science right there.

Just because you don't understand \"science\" doesn't mean other people doesn't understand science.

[Wiach]

You are sooo good (capable and understanding).

Thermite is wonderful stuff. Many of the various alloys had their start in people playing with thermite with small amounts of other metals mixed in.

[Wnali]

In the strict sense, God is hypothetical to people who haven't met Him, or to people who don't recognize that they have met Him.

Evidence is NOT proof. That's why we need faith. Same as the evolutionists need faith to believe that something as impossible as evolution might even have a chance of existing.

[Ucarl]

If you knew anything you'd see how something guided me in earlier threads to ensnare the weary.. gender bias? I believe in the straight path man/woman way of life, anything else is sadly, in my opinion, nothing more than sexual deviancy. And I'm not stupid enough to allure god to anyone or anything, i do however have to lower myself to the language you clearly have misperceptions of.. my point being that EVERYONE ALIVE call's god 'him', and not 'her', you to me are sexually bias, which shines brighter than any english language you use.. why do you think I as a scotsman want rid of the english?

[Ushel]

The closest you'll come to it where a lab experiment can be conducted in order to prove the results, is the story of the hat. No scientific instruments required, since the 'proof ' would become the EVIDENCE you receive upon completion of the 'lab experiment'

[belphegory]

Badecker, I'm gonna call you SBB(SunBakedBrick) from now on...as you are really living up the name exceptionally well.

I'm sure no-one wants to wade through almost two pages of text replies so I'm going to keep this short and sweet:
1. Your science of god and proof that you keep going on about.... is hogwash. You have NOT presented ANY scientific proof at all. You have a theory and opinion.

So in conclusion SBB, you have nothing....CE and complexity does NOT meet the requirements for explanation or proof of existence of god.

The end.