Scientific proof that God exists?

[Astargath]

Your argument says we know plants, rocks, planets are designed because it uses the mechanism inside the things that we design. We designed water bottles, what's the mechanism of a water bottle and how does it relate to the other things you claim god designed?

Why do you think a water bottle has a mechanism?   

''Because it uses all the mechanisms inside the things that we design'' So a bottle can't be used to prove plants are designed by god, give me an example then of your claim.

[BADecker]

Your argument says we know plants, rocks, planets are designed because it uses the mechanism inside the things that we design. We designed water bottles, what's the mechanism of a water bottle and how does it relate to the other things you claim god designed?

Why do you think a water bottle has a mechanism?   

''Because it uses all the mechanisms inside the things that we design'' So a bottle can't be used to prove plants are designed by god, give me an example then of your claim.

Well, the motions of atoms and their subatomic particles are mechanisms that we use inside everything that we design, and even in our design of some not-readily-seen-in-nature forms of atoms. We use natural design in all our design. It is all the same... design.

The fact that you don't know which human designed some pottery that you found in Asia, doesn't mean that it wasn't designed. The fact that you don't know much about the designer of al things doesn't mean that all things weren't designed.

Design is all that there is. we prove it daily by incorporating natural design into all our design. Or isn't our design really design. Is our design something else because we use the stuff that everything is made of?

[Astargath]

Your argument says we know plants, rocks, planets are designed because it uses the mechanism inside the things that we design. We designed water bottles, what's the mechanism of a water bottle and how does it relate to the other things you claim god designed?

Why do you think a water bottle has a mechanism?   

''Because it uses all the mechanisms inside the things that we design'' So a bottle can't be used to prove plants are designed by god, give me an example then of your claim.

Well, the motions of atoms and their subatomic particles are mechanisms that we use inside everything that we design, and even in our design of some not-readily-seen-in-nature forms of atoms. We use natural design in all our design. It is all the same... design.

The fact that you don't know which human designed some pottery that you found in Asia, doesn't mean that it wasn't designed. The fact that you don't know much about the designer of al things doesn't mean that all things weren't designed.

Design is all that there is. we prove it daily by incorporating natural design into all our design. Or isn't our design really design. Is our design something else because we use the stuff that everything is made of?

Ok, I asked you how do you know things are designed, you answered with this:

''How do we know it is design? Because it uses all the mechanisms inside the things that we design'' So you claimed to know things are designed (plants, humans, rocks) because those things use the mechanisms inside the things that human design. Now you are saying that we are the ones incorporating natural design into our design, problem is how do you know there is such thing as ''natural design''?

''Well, the motions of atoms and their subatomic particles are mechanisms that we use inside everything that we design'' No they aren't. We don't use the motions of atoms to create a bottle, at least not on purpose, otherwise you can say you use the motion of atoms doing anything.

The fact is that humans design things, we know that because we can compare them to nature, that's why we say nature is not designed. Everything is filled with flaws, something that you wouldn't expect in a perfect design.

[BADecker]

Ok, I asked you how do you know things are designed, you answered with this:

''How do we know it is design? Because it uses all the mechanisms inside the things that we design'' So you claimed to know things are designed (plants, humans, rocks) because those things use the mechanisms inside the things that human design. Now you are saying that we are the ones incorporating natural design into our design, problem is how do you know there is such thing as ''natural design''?

''Well, the motions of atoms and their subatomic particles are mechanisms that we use inside everything that we design'' No they aren't. We don't use the motions of atoms to create a bottle, at least not on purpose, otherwise you can say you use the motion of atoms doing anything.

The fact is that humans design things, we know that because we can compare them to nature, that's why we say nature is not designed. Everything is filled with flaws, something that you wouldn't expect in a perfect design.

If you think that we don't use the motions of atoms in our creation of bottles, the only thing else that fits is miracles.

When we compare our things to the things of nature, we only determine that we designed them rather than the designer of nature. We still use the basics of design of nature in everything we design. Why? Because design is all that there is.

Everything is filled with flaws relationally, and on our scale of looking at things with our generally limited ability. However, there are no flaws in the laws of physics. If there were, everything would come crashing down in with the minutest of them.

Our flaw/no-flaw universe works like this. Adam and Eve sinned - the first flaw - which should have crashed the universe. Jesus immediately promised the Father that He would fix the flaw... the reason the universe didn't crash. The Father piled up the flaw results, holding the universe in place against the flaw. Jesus took the disruption for the flaw at His crucifixion, and proved that He overcame the flaw and its disruption by His resurrection. All other flaws were included; the flaws were corrected, even though their correction isn't apparent to us in our limited ways of thinking and understanding, generally. The fact that the universe stands, and that the laws of physics remain unbroken, shows that this is so.

[Astargath]

Ok, I asked you how do you know things are designed, you answered with this:

''How do we know it is design? Because it uses all the mechanisms inside the things that we design'' So you claimed to know things are designed (plants, humans, rocks) because those things use the mechanisms inside the things that human design. Now you are saying that we are the ones incorporating natural design into our design, problem is how do you know there is such thing as ''natural design''?

''Well, the motions of atoms and their subatomic particles are mechanisms that we use inside everything that we design'' No they aren't. We don't use the motions of atoms to create a bottle, at least not on purpose, otherwise you can say you use the motion of atoms doing anything.

The fact is that humans design things, we know that because we can compare them to nature, that's why we say nature is not designed. Everything is filled with flaws, something that you wouldn't expect in a perfect design.

If you think that we don't use the motions of atoms in our creation of bottles, the only thing else that fits is miracles.

When we compare our things to the things of nature, we only determine that we designed them rather than the designer of nature. We still use the basics of design of nature in everything we design. Why? Because design is all that there is.

Everything is filled with flaws relationally, and on our scale of looking at things with our generally limited ability. However, there are no flaws in the laws of physics. If there were, everything would come crashing down in with the minutest of them.

Our flaw/no-flaw universe works like this. Adam and Eve sinned - the first flaw - which should have crashed the universe. Jesus immediately promised the Father that He would fix the flaw... the reason the universe didn't crash. The Father piled up the flaw results, holding the universe in place against the flaw. Jesus took the disruption for the flaw at His crucifixion, and proved that He overcame the flaw and its disruption by His resurrection. All other flaws were included; the flaws were corrected, even though their correction isn't apparent to us in our limited ways of thinking and understanding, generally. The fact that the universe stands, and that the laws of physics remain unbroken, shows that this is so.

Recycling the same bad design argument isn't going to prove god, sorry. There is no way to determine whether nature is designed or not and you clearly have no test, study or anything to prove plants or rocks are designed.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_design
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Suboptimal_design
http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=2520


And as I said many times, even if all of this showed a creator exists, in no way it shows that it's Yahweh as you claim.

[BADecker]

Ok, I asked you how do you know things are designed, you answered with this:

''How do we know it is design? Because it uses all the mechanisms inside the things that we design'' So you claimed to know things are designed (plants, humans, rocks) because those things use the mechanisms inside the things that human design. Now you are saying that we are the ones incorporating natural design into our design, problem is how do you know there is such thing as ''natural design''?

''Well, the motions of atoms and their subatomic particles are mechanisms that we use inside everything that we design'' No they aren't. We don't use the motions of atoms to create a bottle, at least not on purpose, otherwise you can say you use the motion of atoms doing anything.

The fact is that humans design things, we know that because we can compare them to nature, that's why we say nature is not designed. Everything is filled with flaws, something that you wouldn't expect in a perfect design.

If you think that we don't use the motions of atoms in our creation of bottles, the only thing else that fits is miracles.

When we compare our things to the things of nature, we only determine that we designed them rather than the designer of nature. We still use the basics of design of nature in everything we design. Why? Because design is all that there is.

Everything is filled with flaws relationally, and on our scale of looking at things with our generally limited ability. However, there are no flaws in the laws of physics. If there were, everything would come crashing down in with the minutest of them.

Our flaw/no-flaw universe works like this. Adam and Eve sinned - the first flaw - which should have crashed the universe. Jesus immediately promised the Father that He would fix the flaw... the reason the universe didn't crash. The Father piled up the flaw results, holding the universe in place against the flaw. Jesus took the disruption for the flaw at His crucifixion, and proved that He overcame the flaw and its disruption by His resurrection. All other flaws were included; the flaws were corrected, even though their correction isn't apparent to us in our limited ways of thinking and understanding, generally. The fact that the universe stands, and that the laws of physics remain unbroken, shows that this is so.

Recycling the same bad design argument isn't going to prove god, sorry. There is no way to determine whether nature is designed or not and you clearly have no test, study or anything to prove plants or rocks are designed.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_design
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Suboptimal_design
http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=2520


And as I said many times, even if all of this showed a creator exists, in no way it shows that it's Yahweh as you claim.

I can accept that you and others don't want to understand the design that exists in all things.

[Astargath]

Ok, I asked you how do you know things are designed, you answered with this:

''How do we know it is design? Because it uses all the mechanisms inside the things that we design'' So you claimed to know things are designed (plants, humans, rocks) because those things use the mechanisms inside the things that human design. Now you are saying that we are the ones incorporating natural design into our design, problem is how do you know there is such thing as ''natural design''?

''Well, the motions of atoms and their subatomic particles are mechanisms that we use inside everything that we design'' No they aren't. We don't use the motions of atoms to create a bottle, at least not on purpose, otherwise you can say you use the motion of atoms doing anything.

The fact is that humans design things, we know that because we can compare them to nature, that's why we say nature is not designed. Everything is filled with flaws, something that you wouldn't expect in a perfect design.

If you think that we don't use the motions of atoms in our creation of bottles, the only thing else that fits is miracles.

When we compare our things to the things of nature, we only determine that we designed them rather than the designer of nature. We still use the basics of design of nature in everything we design. Why? Because design is all that there is.

Everything is filled with flaws relationally, and on our scale of looking at things with our generally limited ability. However, there are no flaws in the laws of physics. If there were, everything would come crashing down in with the minutest of them.

Our flaw/no-flaw universe works like this. Adam and Eve sinned - the first flaw - which should have crashed the universe. Jesus immediately promised the Father that He would fix the flaw... the reason the universe didn't crash. The Father piled up the flaw results, holding the universe in place against the flaw. Jesus took the disruption for the flaw at His crucifixion, and proved that He overcame the flaw and its disruption by His resurrection. All other flaws were included; the flaws were corrected, even though their correction isn't apparent to us in our limited ways of thinking and understanding, generally. The fact that the universe stands, and that the laws of physics remain unbroken, shows that this is so.

Recycling the same bad design argument isn't going to prove god, sorry. There is no way to determine whether nature is designed or not and you clearly have no test, study or anything to prove plants or rocks are designed.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_design
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Suboptimal_design
http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=2520


And as I said many times, even if all of this showed a creator exists, in no way it shows that it's Yahweh as you claim.

I can accept that you and others don't want to understand the design that exists in all things.

If you can provide evidence I will sure understand it, just claiming that other things are designed because they are it's not an argument.

[BADecker]

I can accept that you and others don't want to understand the design that exists in all things.

If you can provide evidence I will sure understand it, just claiming that other things are designed because they are it's not an argument.

If you can provide evidence for lack of design, I will surely understand it. Just claiming that things are not designed because they simply are not, is not an argument.

[Astargath]

I can accept that you and others don't want to understand the design that exists in all things.

If you can provide evidence I will sure understand it, just claiming that other things are designed because they are it's not an argument.

If you can provide evidence for lack of design, I will surely understand it. Just claiming that things are not designed because they simply are not, is not an argument.

It's always like that for you, isn't it. Why should I provide evidence for things that are not designed? You are assuming that everything is designed for no reason, I'm not the one trying to prove god you are.

[BADecker]

If you can provide evidence for lack of design, I will surely understand it. Just claiming that things are not designed because they simply are not, is not an argument.

It's always like that for you, isn't it. Why should I provide evidence for things that are not designed? You are assuming that everything is designed for no reason, I'm not the one trying to prove god you are.

You shouldn't provide evidence for things not designed... for at least 2 reasons:
1. There aren't any, so you can't;
2. You should be spending all your time changing your heart to believe in God so that you can be saved.

All the things that mankind designs operate through the things of nature. Everything is designed. If it weren't, mankind couldn't design anything, because he uses nature in his designs. Either mankind desing including the nature he uses, or no design, not even of mankind.

Why? Because in mankind design, he uses nature. It's design or it isn't, both mankind and nature, because they are essentially the same at their core.

[Astargath]

If you can provide evidence for lack of design, I will surely understand it. Just claiming that things are not designed because they simply are not, is not an argument.

It's always like that for you, isn't it. Why should I provide evidence for things that are not designed? You are assuming that everything is designed for no reason, I'm not the one trying to prove god you are.

You shouldn't provide evidence for things not designed... for at least 2 reasons:
1. There aren't any, so you can't;
2. You should be spending all your time changing your heart to believe in God so that you can be saved.

All the things that mankind designs operate through the things of nature. Everything is designed. If it weren't, mankind couldn't design anything, because he uses nature in his designs. Either mankind desing including the nature he uses, or no design, not even of mankind.

Why? Because in mankind design, he uses nature. It's design or it isn't, both mankind and nature, because they are essentially the same at their core.

''Everything is designed. If it weren't, mankind couldn't design anything, because he uses nature in his designs'' What are these arguments lmao, you are desperate. If things weren't designed mankind couldn't design anything? Why, how does that work lol. A computer or a spoon aren't designed copying nature. Stop with this stupid shit.

[BADecker]

If you can provide evidence for lack of design, I will surely understand it. Just claiming that things are not designed because they simply are not, is not an argument.

It's always like that for you, isn't it. Why should I provide evidence for things that are not designed? You are assuming that everything is designed for no reason, I'm not the one trying to prove god you are.

You shouldn't provide evidence for things not designed... for at least 2 reasons:
1. There aren't any, so you can't;
2. You should be spending all your time changing your heart to believe in God so that you can be saved.

All the things that mankind designs operate through the things of nature. Everything is designed. If it weren't, mankind couldn't design anything, because he uses nature in his designs. Either mankind desing including the nature he uses, or no design, not even of mankind.

Why? Because in mankind design, he uses nature. It's design or it isn't, both mankind and nature, because they are essentially the same at their core.

''Everything is designed. If it weren't, mankind couldn't design anything, because he uses nature in his designs'' What are these arguments lmao, you are desperate. If things weren't designed mankind couldn't design anything? Why, how does that work lol. A computer or a spoon aren't designed copying nature. Stop with this stupid shit.

Some people use the phrase "connect the dots." You, it seems, can't even connect two dots. Let's try again, with the spoon you mentioned.

Somebody designs the spoon. He doesn't only design the idea of a spoon. He designs an actual spoon.

What is the spoon made out of? Atoms and molecules. They are part of the design. If they weren't, there would be no spoon or design.

Atoms and molecules are part of design. We can see it in the spoon.

Are these atoms or molecules and different than the atoms and molecules of the same type that are not in the spoon? No. They are all the same; they are all design.

The spoon is a silver spoon. It is made of silver. Silver is of design. The silver spoon designer has proven it by designing the spoon.

[Dnder]

BADecker I just love how you ignored the statement about how you say humanity popped into existance according to our argument (which according to you is impossible) then you ignore the questions of "so god just popped into existence?" as if the statement was never made. Good show my boy.

[BADecker]

BADecker I just love how you ignored the statement about how you say humanity popped into existance according to our argument (which according to you is impossible) then you ignore the questions of "so god just popped into existence?" as if the statement was never made. Good show my boy.

Why, thank you. I enjoy it when I can cause someone to have love. But really. This is the scientific proof for the existence of God thread. So, do you have any proof that can stand against the combined cause and effect and entropy and complexity? Or against the machine nature of the universe, and machines have makers? But if you have more proof for the existence of God, I think we would all love to read it. Show it to us so that you create love in us, like I created love in you (as you said above).

[mockcooleat]

Scrolls that was found that proves that the bible is true is a scientific proof. Why? Science wants a tangible proof and that scroll is tangible and proves that all the words on the bible that God shared is true.

[Astargath]

If you can provide evidence for lack of design, I will surely understand it. Just claiming that things are not designed because they simply are not, is not an argument.

It's always like that for you, isn't it. Why should I provide evidence for things that are not designed? You are assuming that everything is designed for no reason, I'm not the one trying to prove god you are.

You shouldn't provide evidence for things not designed... for at least 2 reasons:
1. There aren't any, so you can't;
2. You should be spending all your time changing your heart to believe in God so that you can be saved.

All the things that mankind designs operate through the things of nature. Everything is designed. If it weren't, mankind couldn't design anything, because he uses nature in his designs. Either mankind desing including the nature he uses, or no design, not even of mankind.

Why? Because in mankind design, he uses nature. It's design or it isn't, both mankind and nature, because they are essentially the same at their core.

''Everything is designed. If it weren't, mankind couldn't design anything, because he uses nature in his designs'' What are these arguments lmao, you are desperate. If things weren't designed mankind couldn't design anything? Why, how does that work lol. A computer or a spoon aren't designed copying nature. Stop with this stupid shit.

Some people use the phrase "connect the dots." You, it seems, can't even connect two dots. Let's try again, with the spoon you mentioned.

Somebody designs the spoon. He doesn't only design the idea of a spoon. He designs an actual spoon.

What is the spoon made out of? Atoms and molecules. They are part of the design. If they weren't, there would be no spoon or design.

Atoms and molecules are part of design. We can see it in the spoon.

Are these atoms or molecules and different than the atoms and molecules of the same type that are not in the spoon? No. They are all the same; they are all design.

The spoon is a silver spoon. It is made of silver. Silver is of design. The silver spoon designer has proven it by designing the spoon.

I don't think that you understand your own arguments. You are saying that because humans build stuff and because that stuff is made of molecules and atoms (like everything lol) means that they are designed? Worst argument and literally no logic.

[BADecker]

I don't think that you understand your own arguments. You are saying that because humans build stuff and because that stuff is made of molecules and atoms (like everything lol) means that they are designed? Worst argument and literally no logic.

Actually, it strikes at the root of the question.

For example. If everybody knew for a fact that everything was designed by God, there would be no question. So the question has to do with the things that people know, not the fact of design or no design. However...

The general consensus among scientists (which is changing, btw) has been that there is only a material make-up in people. Science believes that their is no such thing as the soul and spirit, and that emotion is essentially an imaginary abstraction in the material/biological operation.

If this were the case, pure cause and effect would have to rule in everything. This would mean that opinions and/or scientific proof about the design question would have had to have been programmed in by Whoever/Whatever did the C&E programming. Why? Because we know of no complexity as great as opposed thinking like this that comes about by anything that seems random. Rather, randomness (standard random as opposed to pure random) leads to mediocrity. Prove it to yourself by flipping a coin a thousand times. The result will be nearly an equal number of heads flips as tails.

The whole idea of complexity as it exists, contradicts the mediocrity of standard random. And C&E in everything, without even a shred of evidence of pure random, has as its only result, a Programmer... in the face of the kind of complexity that exists. And a programmer shows that somewhere back in the beginning of the programming, there was the existence of Pure random, and such things as soul and spirit.

[QuestionAuthority]

You got that all wrong butterbean, the machine nature of the universe is the proof that goof god doesn’t exist.

The religious writings all over the world, in every language and with all different gods show the god is a random almost chaotic psychopath. He gets angry at the drop of a hat like a bipolar loon and decides to kill everyone on the planet with a flood. Time and time again his chaotic loony behavior manifests itself as a random mean-cruel master.

If we are designed by him and in his image why did he have to kill all of us? Oh yeah, he’s a deranged psychopath that kills his children if they misbehave.

You have it all wrong! Like as intelligent designers design and build the machines that people make, even so the maker of machine universe is far beyond the intelligence of man, like the machine universe is far beyond the machines of man.

Sounds like either:
1. you haven't studied the religious writings all over the earth;
2. you are misrepresenting them.

If you had been sincere, and had done the studies, you would find that the God of the Bible has made a miracle in the Bible and the nation of Israel.

You misunderstand the nature of the universe. Originally, the universe operated like a big perpetual motion machine. Mankind sinned, which broke up the perpetual motion activity of the universe. If God, Himself, in the form of Jesus, had not upheld the universe at great cost to Himself, it all would have been destroyed way back in the Beginning times, and mankind right along with it. That doesn't sound like a deranged psychopath to me.

You simply misunderstand. The problem is, you like yourself that way.

If we are designed by him and in his image why did he have to kill all of us in a flood? Oh yeah, he’s a deranged psychopath that kills his children if they misbehave.

So, are you going to answer this question nutcracker or will you just ignore it like all of the other questions you have no good answer to.

Why is your god such a cruel asshole? And if he hates us so much, why create us in the first place? Did he just want a species to torture for sport?

[42XDA]

yes god exist

[Astargath]

I don't think that you understand your own arguments. You are saying that because humans build stuff and because that stuff is made of molecules and atoms (like everything lol) means that they are designed? Worst argument and literally no logic.

Actually, it strikes at the root of the question.

For example. If everybody knew for a fact that everything was designed by God, there would be no question. So the question has to do with the things that people know, not the fact of design or no design. However...

The general consensus among scientists (which is changing, btw) has been that there is only a material make-up in people. Science believes that their is no such thing as the soul and spirit, and that emotion is essentially an imaginary abstraction in the material/biological operation.

If this were the case, pure cause and effect would have to rule in everything. This would mean that opinions and/or scientific proof about the design question would have had to have been programmed in by Whoever/Whatever did the C&E programming. Why? Because we know of no complexity as great as opposed thinking like this that comes about by anything that seems random. Rather, randomness (standard random as opposed to pure random) leads to mediocrity. Prove it to yourself by flipping a coin a thousand times. The result will be nearly an equal number of heads flips as tails.

The whole idea of complexity as it exists, contradicts the mediocrity of standard random. And C&E in everything, without even a shred of evidence of pure random, has as its only result, a Programmer... in the face of the kind of complexity that exists. And a programmer shows that somewhere back in the beginning of the programming, there was the existence of Pure random, and such things as soul and spirit.

The problem is that you are trying to show why you think everything is designed, so far you haven't done that. Nothing indicates nature is designed, we know complexity can arise from simple rules.