Scientific proof that God exists?

[sirazimuth]

I think that people who believe in god are retarded but one thing that i find even mooooore retarded are retarded people who believe in god but need a proof of his existence.

Not bad for a noob and judging from post history I don't believe you are spammer
...I bestow thee a merit...yw

(and if you are a spam bot, thats a damn good algorithm, so merit deserved anyway)

[drmilind2004]

There is no scientific proof of this, neither will any ever be forthcoming. If at all, you will find evidence aplenty that establishes the redundancy of the notion if 'deity' in our modern, scientific world.

[Blackstar015]

Science is facts. God is faith. They never mix.

[CristianOff]

The only proof is scientists claiming that Big Bang can't exist "out of nowhere" and they agreed on a "powerful force that we can't comprehend"

[BADecker]

You only ''proved'' that those things indicate there is a creator/creators, nothing in your ''proof'' indicates that it has to be your particular god and not multiple gods, maybe aliens, maybe something else. So your proof, again, does not show it's god.

Well, no. That's not all.

The fact that entropy hasn't turned everything into dissipated simplicity, shows that there was a Beginning to the universe, and that it wasn't too far in the past, cosmically speaking.

Combine this with the fact that we haven't found anything that comes into existence, spontaneously, without something bringing it into existence - in fact, spontaneous generation without a source doesn't even make sense in our universe - shows that the universe had something else as its "starter..." something other than itself.

This means that the Starter of the universe was not something within the universe. Since It was not within the universe at the time It started the universe - except that It might have injected part of Itself into the universe exactly at the time It started the universe - shows that it was "outside" the universe.

What does outside-the-universe mean? It means that we know nothing about it. Why? Because we know things according to the way the universe works... not according to something that has no properties of the universe. We don't know if It (the Creator) is a being. We don't know if It has complexity. We don't know if It has more than one unit. We don't even know if the terms "one" or "multiple" even fit something outside. The only thing we know is "outside."

Outside is one. There are not two outsides with regard to us. All we understand about whatever is outside the universe is that it is outside. One. Outside.

My particular God is the God Who started the universe. He/It is outside >>> One.

Of course He/It is alien. The only way He/It would not be completely alien, is that He/It has ascribed some of His/Its qualities to within the universe... at least in artificial form. If He/It had ascribed all of His/Its qualities to within, then He/It would totally be part of the universe, and science might be able to track Him/It down, someday.

But having been "outside" at the time He/It created the universe shows our God to be ONE. Did you catch that? He/It is your God, too, even though you barely recognize Him/It. Why? Because He/It created the stuff that you are made of, just like all of the rest of the stuff of the universe.

Scientific proof that God exists! Case closed.

Was that like a game of words or ?

''What does outside-the-universe mean? It means that we know nothing about it.''
''We don't know if It has more than one unit. We don't even know if the terms "one" or "multiple" even fit something outside.''
''My particular God is the God Who started the universe.''

Extremely conflicting statements right there. You say we don't know anything about what's outside the universe (in fact science doesn't even know if there can be something outside) but then you claim to know your god is the one that created the universe, do you not see the flawed logic in this? A kid would.

No conflict at all. The simple term "being outside the universe" doesn't mean that there is a border to the universe, and the thing outside is beyond that border. Rather, "being outside the universe" simply means that whatever it is doesn't fit the universe in any way, even in the term "being outside the universe."

Science is barely starting to find things out. The complexity of everything is so great, that we barely have a handle on the fundamentals, scientifically.

[BADecker]

Science is facts. God is faith. They never mix.

God is fact. Science uses a little fact regarding the things that God made. But science theory (which is part of science) is faith - faith in science.

[Astargath]

You only ''proved'' that those things indicate there is a creator/creators, nothing in your ''proof'' indicates that it has to be your particular god and not multiple gods, maybe aliens, maybe something else. So your proof, again, does not show it's god.

Well, no. That's not all.

The fact that entropy hasn't turned everything into dissipated simplicity, shows that there was a Beginning to the universe, and that it wasn't too far in the past, cosmically speaking.

Combine this with the fact that we haven't found anything that comes into existence, spontaneously, without something bringing it into existence - in fact, spontaneous generation without a source doesn't even make sense in our universe - shows that the universe had something else as its "starter..." something other than itself.

This means that the Starter of the universe was not something within the universe. Since It was not within the universe at the time It started the universe - except that It might have injected part of Itself into the universe exactly at the time It started the universe - shows that it was "outside" the universe.

What does outside-the-universe mean? It means that we know nothing about it. Why? Because we know things according to the way the universe works... not according to something that has no properties of the universe. We don't know if It (the Creator) is a being. We don't know if It has complexity. We don't know if It has more than one unit. We don't even know if the terms "one" or "multiple" even fit something outside. The only thing we know is "outside."

Outside is one. There are not two outsides with regard to us. All we understand about whatever is outside the universe is that it is outside. One. Outside.

My particular God is the God Who started the universe. He/It is outside >>> One.

Of course He/It is alien. The only way He/It would not be completely alien, is that He/It has ascribed some of His/Its qualities to within the universe... at least in artificial form. If He/It had ascribed all of His/Its qualities to within, then He/It would totally be part of the universe, and science might be able to track Him/It down, someday.

But having been "outside" at the time He/It created the universe shows our God to be ONE. Did you catch that? He/It is your God, too, even though you barely recognize Him/It. Why? Because He/It created the stuff that you are made of, just like all of the rest of the stuff of the universe.

Scientific proof that God exists! Case closed.

Was that like a game of words or ?

''What does outside-the-universe mean? It means that we know nothing about it.''
''We don't know if It has more than one unit. We don't even know if the terms "one" or "multiple" even fit something outside.''
''My particular God is the God Who started the universe.''

Extremely conflicting statements right there. You say we don't know anything about what's outside the universe (in fact science doesn't even know if there can be something outside) but then you claim to know your god is the one that created the universe, do you not see the flawed logic in this? A kid would.

No conflict at all. The simple term "being outside the universe" doesn't mean that there is a border to the universe, and the thing outside is beyond that border. Rather, "being outside the universe" simply means that whatever it is doesn't fit the universe in any way, even in the term "being outside the universe."

Science is barely starting to find things out. The complexity of everything is so great, that we barely have a handle on the fundamentals, scientifically.

First of all ''being outside the universe'' is not known to be true, there might not be anything outside of it and it's a vague term. If it simply means that whatever it is doesn't fit the universe in any way (which it doesn't) it still doesn't mean it was god, like how do you go from, we don't know what it is, it's just something that doesn't fit our universe to, it's obviously a god? Where is the evidence?

''The complexity of everything'' Define complexity.

[BADecker]

No conflict at all. The simple term "being outside the universe" doesn't mean that there is a border to the universe, and the thing outside is beyond that border. Rather, "being outside the universe" simply means that whatever it is doesn't fit the universe in any way, even in the term "being outside the universe."

Science is barely starting to find things out. The complexity of everything is so great, that we barely have a handle on the fundamentals, scientifically.

First of all ''being outside the universe'' is not known to be true, there might not be anything outside of it and it's a vague term. If it simply means that whatever it is doesn't fit the universe in any way (which it doesn't) it still doesn't mean it was god, like how do you go from, we don't know what it is, it's just something that doesn't fit our universe to, it's obviously a god? Where is the evidence?

''The complexity of everything'' Define complexity.

The fact that the term "outside the universe" does not fit whatever it is that is outside the universe, shows that there absolutely is something outside the universe, and that whatever it is, is way more different that anything within the universe that we can understand.

[Astargath]

No conflict at all. The simple term "being outside the universe" doesn't mean that there is a border to the universe, and the thing outside is beyond that border. Rather, "being outside the universe" simply means that whatever it is doesn't fit the universe in any way, even in the term "being outside the universe."

Science is barely starting to find things out. The complexity of everything is so great, that we barely have a handle on the fundamentals, scientifically.

First of all ''being outside the universe'' is not known to be true, there might not be anything outside of it and it's a vague term. If it simply means that whatever it is doesn't fit the universe in any way (which it doesn't) it still doesn't mean it was god, like how do you go from, we don't know what it is, it's just something that doesn't fit our universe to, it's obviously a god? Where is the evidence?

''The complexity of everything'' Define complexity.

The fact that the term "outside the universe" does not fit whatever it is that is outside the universe, shows that there absolutely is something outside the universe, and that whatever it is, is way more different that anything within the universe that we can understand.

Sure but how does that show it's god and not something else?

''The fact that the term "outside the universe" '' No the fact is that, ''outside the universe'' are words just like a ghost or a troll are words, it doesn't mean they exist, we don't know if there is such thing as ''outside the universe''

[BADecker]

No conflict at all. The simple term "being outside the universe" doesn't mean that there is a border to the universe, and the thing outside is beyond that border. Rather, "being outside the universe" simply means that whatever it is doesn't fit the universe in any way, even in the term "being outside the universe."

Science is barely starting to find things out. The complexity of everything is so great, that we barely have a handle on the fundamentals, scientifically.

First of all ''being outside the universe'' is not known to be true, there might not be anything outside of it and it's a vague term. If it simply means that whatever it is doesn't fit the universe in any way (which it doesn't) it still doesn't mean it was god, like how do you go from, we don't know what it is, it's just something that doesn't fit our universe to, it's obviously a god? Where is the evidence?

''The complexity of everything'' Define complexity.

The fact that the term "outside the universe" does not fit whatever it is that is outside the universe, shows that there absolutely is something outside the universe, and that whatever it is, is way more different that anything within the universe that we can understand.

Sure but how does that show it's god and not something else?

''The fact that the term "outside the universe" '' No the fact is that, ''outside the universe'' are words just like a ghost or a troll are words, it doesn't mean they exist, we don't know if there is such thing as ''outside the universe''

Actually, we DO know that something outside the universe exists. The fact that there is nothing in the universe that exists without being made by something else, shows that there had to be something else that made the universe. Nothing makes itself from scratch when it does not exist in the first place.

God is the something else that you talk about. If there were not enough complexity in existence for us to reason and have personal identity (artificial as it might be), maybe we could say that it wasn't God. But the fact that we can speak and write and think intelligently, and use our intelligence to recognize the complexity of the universe, shows that God would have to have such and even greater, just to make it all. The word "God" fits, and especially because we don't understand what God is.

[Astargath]

No conflict at all. The simple term "being outside the universe" doesn't mean that there is a border to the universe, and the thing outside is beyond that border. Rather, "being outside the universe" simply means that whatever it is doesn't fit the universe in any way, even in the term "being outside the universe."

Science is barely starting to find things out. The complexity of everything is so great, that we barely have a handle on the fundamentals, scientifically.

First of all ''being outside the universe'' is not known to be true, there might not be anything outside of it and it's a vague term. If it simply means that whatever it is doesn't fit the universe in any way (which it doesn't) it still doesn't mean it was god, like how do you go from, we don't know what it is, it's just something that doesn't fit our universe to, it's obviously a god? Where is the evidence?

''The complexity of everything'' Define complexity.

The fact that the term "outside the universe" does not fit whatever it is that is outside the universe, shows that there absolutely is something outside the universe, and that whatever it is, is way more different that anything within the universe that we can understand.

Sure but how does that show it's god and not something else?

''The fact that the term "outside the universe" '' No the fact is that, ''outside the universe'' are words just like a ghost or a troll are words, it doesn't mean they exist, we don't know if there is such thing as ''outside the universe''

Actually, we DO know that something outside the universe exists. The fact that there is nothing in the universe that exists without being made by something else, shows that there had to be something else that made the universe. Nothing makes itself from scratch when it does not exist in the first place.

God is the something else that you talk about. If there were not enough complexity in existence for us to reason and have personal identity (artificial as it might be), maybe we could say that it wasn't God. But the fact that we can speak and write and think intelligently, and use our intelligence to recognize the complexity of the universe, shows that God would have to have such and even greater, just to make it all. The word "God" fits, and especially because we don't understand what God is.

Again, you keep talking about complexity without defining it. ''The word "God" fits, and especially because we don't understand what God is.'' The word Zeus also fits, all the other god names also fit, aliens also fit, super intelligent being from outside the universe also fits, and so and so on, there is no evidence that points towards god.

[avbitx]

There,s nothing we can do to prove Beliefs, because GOD is belief.

[BADecker]

Again, you keep talking about complexity without defining it. ''The word "God" fits, and especially because we don't understand what God is.'' The word Zeus also fits, all the other god names also fit, aliens also fit, super intelligent being from outside the universe also fits, and so and so on, there is no evidence that points towards god.

To help you out, check the dictionary and encyclopedias for the definition of complexity.

Perhaps you have studied about Zeus enough to know that Zeus fits. But I guarantee you, not all other gods fit, nor do aliens.

If you want to call the God of the universe "super intelligent being from outside the universe," you have just described some aspects of God.

All you are saying is that all evidence points toward God. Why? Because "god" is not "God." So, you are right... god doesn't fit, but God does.

[BADecker]

There,s nothing we can do to prove Beliefs, because GOD is belief.

How do you know that empty space exists? You can't grab hold of it. You can't find ways to analyze it directly. Science doesn't really know what it is. So, can you prove that empty space exists? Or is empty space just a belief?

The way we know that empty space exists is to analyze relationships between some of the things that lie within empty space. So, we know that empty space is a fact. We don't have to simply believe.

Cause and effect, entropy, and complexity, when combined as they are in our universe, prove that God exists. Why? Because these 3 things can't exist together as they do in our universe without God making them to exist this way.

Do these 3 describe God? Barely. We can't tell from these 3 if He is the God af any particular religion, or if there is no religion that describes Him. But they DO let us know that He exists, simply because they could not exist without Him.

[Astargath]

Again, you keep talking about complexity without defining it. ''The word "God" fits, and especially because we don't understand what God is.'' The word Zeus also fits, all the other god names also fit, aliens also fit, super intelligent being from outside the universe also fits, and so and so on, there is no evidence that points towards god.

To help you out, check the dictionary and encyclopedias for the definition of complexity.

Perhaps you have studied about Zeus enough to know that Zeus fits. But I guarantee you, not all other gods fit, nor do aliens.

If you want to call the God of the universe "super intelligent being from outside the universe," you have just described some aspects of God.

All you are saying is that all evidence points toward God. Why? Because "god" is not "God." So, you are right... god doesn't fit, but God does.

''the state of having many parts and being difficult to understand or find an answer to'' You said ''If there were not enough complexity in existence for us to reason and have personal identity''
So if there wasn't enough what, enough parts that are difficult to understand?

If there were not enough (parts and being difficult to understand or find an answer to) in existence for us to reason and have personal identity. That's what you said, how does that make any sense?

[BADecker]

Again, you keep talking about complexity without defining it. ''The word "God" fits, and especially because we don't understand what God is.'' The word Zeus also fits, all the other god names also fit, aliens also fit, super intelligent being from outside the universe also fits, and so and so on, there is no evidence that points towards god.

To help you out, check the dictionary and encyclopedias for the definition of complexity.

Perhaps you have studied about Zeus enough to know that Zeus fits. But I guarantee you, not all other gods fit, nor do aliens.

If you want to call the God of the universe "super intelligent being from outside the universe," you have just described some aspects of God.

All you are saying is that all evidence points toward God. Why? Because "god" is not "God." So, you are right... god doesn't fit, but God does.

''the state of having many parts and being difficult to understand or find an answer to'' You said ''If there were not enough complexity in existence for us to reason and have personal identity''
So if there wasn't enough what, enough parts that are difficult to understand?

If there were not enough (parts and being difficult to understand or find an answer to) in existence for us to reason and have personal identity. That's what you said, how does that make any sense?

Made perfect sense to God.     

[Astargath]

There,s nothing we can do to prove Beliefs, because GOD is belief.

How do you know that empty space exists? You can't grab hold of it. You can't find ways to analyze it directly. Science doesn't really know what it is. So, can you prove that empty space exists? Or is empty space just a belief?

The way we know that empty space exists is to analyze relationships between some of the things that lie within empty space. So, we know that empty space is a fact. We don't have to simply believe.

Cause and effect, entropy, and complexity, when combined as they are in our universe, prove that God exists. Why? Because these 3 things can't exist together as they do in our universe without God making them to exist this way.

Do these 3 describe God? Barely. We can't tell from these 3 if He is the God af any particular religion, or if there is no religion that describes Him. But they DO let us know that He exists, simply because they could not exist without Him.

''Cause and effect, entropy, and complexity, when combined as they are in our universe, prove that God exists. Why? Because these 3 things can't exist together as they do in our universe without God making them to exist this way.'' How so?

Why is a god (your god) necessary to make those 3 things exist? You are simply assuming it for some unknown reason when your whole argument doesn't say anything about god. Where in your argument do you show that those 3 things can't exist without god?

[BADecker]

There,s nothing we can do to prove Beliefs, because GOD is belief.

How do you know that empty space exists? You can't grab hold of it. You can't find ways to analyze it directly. Science doesn't really know what it is. So, can you prove that empty space exists? Or is empty space just a belief?

The way we know that empty space exists is to analyze relationships between some of the things that lie within empty space. So, we know that empty space is a fact. We don't have to simply believe.

Cause and effect, entropy, and complexity, when combined as they are in our universe, prove that God exists. Why? Because these 3 things can't exist together as they do in our universe without God making them to exist this way.

Do these 3 describe God? Barely. We can't tell from these 3 if He is the God af any particular religion, or if there is no religion that describes Him. But they DO let us know that He exists, simply because they could not exist without Him.

''Cause and effect, entropy, and complexity, when combined as they are in our universe, prove that God exists. Why? Because these 3 things can't exist together as they do in our universe without God making them to exist this way.'' How so?

Why is a god (your god) necessary to make those 3 things exist? You are simply assuming it for some unknown reason when your whole argument doesn't say anything about god. Where in your argument do you show that those 3 things can't exist without god?

I have explained this over and over for you. If you are really curious, go on back over the thread and read what I have said. Start here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380.

[Astargath]

There,s nothing we can do to prove Beliefs, because GOD is belief.

How do you know that empty space exists? You can't grab hold of it. You can't find ways to analyze it directly. Science doesn't really know what it is. So, can you prove that empty space exists? Or is empty space just a belief?

The way we know that empty space exists is to analyze relationships between some of the things that lie within empty space. So, we know that empty space is a fact. We don't have to simply believe.

Cause and effect, entropy, and complexity, when combined as they are in our universe, prove that God exists. Why? Because these 3 things can't exist together as they do in our universe without God making them to exist this way.

Do these 3 describe God? Barely. We can't tell from these 3 if He is the God af any particular religion, or if there is no religion that describes Him. But they DO let us know that He exists, simply because they could not exist without Him.

''Cause and effect, entropy, and complexity, when combined as they are in our universe, prove that God exists. Why? Because these 3 things can't exist together as they do in our universe without God making them to exist this way.'' How so?

Why is a god (your god) necessary to make those 3 things exist? You are simply assuming it for some unknown reason when your whole argument doesn't say anything about god. Where in your argument do you show that those 3 things can't exist without god?

I have explained this over and over for you. If you are really curious, go on back over the thread and read what I have said. Start here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380.

Nope, we already discussed this several times and always ends up with you not being able to explain how it points to your god. As previously discussed: Nothing in your argument rules out the possibility of different entities

Even if we agree with all the arguments there, it still doesn't show it was your god and not other god or multiple gods or multiple aliens or a simulation or anything that you can imagine. Your argument only shows 1 feature of what created the universe, it says it has to be more complex so anything that's more complex could be the creator/creators.

Again, you can't really get away with this badecker, your argument is dead, admit it.

[Ociwiw]

Why prove something?  What is the point of this.  After all, it would be better for no one if they prove that it exists or, on the contrary, that it does not exist!