Scientific proof that God exists?

[drmundo]

god exists. just tell a white man to grow a long ass hair and wear a white gown.

[BADecker]

I asserted God to be the acme of "minimum entropy state."

We don't know that this is God. We don't even know that this is the crux of God. We have never seen something like minimum entropy in this universe. In fact, there may be no minimum entropy. That is, there might be such a thing as NO entropy.

God totally might be from elsewhere and else-when. He might be totally from somewhere that has nothing to do with entropy or lack of it, or any of the laws of this universe, whatsoever. In fact, if the universe is about 6,000 years old like the Bible says, God must have kick-started a whole lot of it into action after He set it in place. Being part of anything we know about this universe would make such a thing impossible.

The point? "... acme of 'minimum entropy state,'" is a good guess... another idea to consider. But probably there are aspects of God that are so extremely different than ANYTHING in this universe, that the word "different" is completely inapplicable.

Reconsidering, God would seem a minimum entropy state of existence (which isn't soley this mere universe).

How do we know? Maybe entropy or non-entropy doesn't apply to God. Maybe He just uses it. We hardly know what this universe is all about. How can we tell much of anything about God? Of course, I don't know that God isn't a minimum entropy state.

"...existence (which isn't solely this mere universe)."

I am not disagreeing. Yet, how can we use logic on something that is "un-logic," but uses logic at the same time?

(You're confusing "without" with "within.")

By inference, one may (to degree) arrive upon that without the rationally ineligible from it.

We are within what we are within. Since we are what we are, and since we don't know much about what we really are, let's start making all kinds of guesses about what is without, right?

[username18333]

I asserted God to be the acme of "minimum entropy state."

We don't know that this is God. We don't even know that this is the crux of God. We have never seen something like minimum entropy in this universe. In fact, there may be no minimum entropy. That is, there might be such a thing as NO entropy.

God totally might be from elsewhere and else-when. He might be totally from somewhere that has nothing to do with entropy or lack of it, or any of the laws of this universe, whatsoever. In fact, if the universe is about 6,000 years old like the Bible says, God must have kick-started a whole lot of it into action after He set it in place. Being part of anything we know about this universe would make such a thing impossible.

The point? "... acme of 'minimum entropy state,'" is a good guess... another idea to consider. But probably there are aspects of God that are so extremely different than ANYTHING in this universe, that the word "different" is completely inapplicable.

Reconsidering, God would seem a minimum entropy state of existence (which isn't soley this mere universe).

How do we know? Maybe entropy or non-entropy doesn't apply to God. Maybe He just uses it. We hardly know what this universe is all about. How can we tell much of anything about God? Of course, I don't know that God isn't a minimum entropy state.

"...existence (which isn't solely this mere universe)."

I am not disagreeing. Yet, how can we use logic on something that is "un-logic," but uses logic at the same time?

(You're confusing "without" with "within.")

By inference, one may (to degree) arrive upon that without the rationally ineligible from it.

We are within what we are within. Since we are what we are, and since we don't know much about what we really are, let's start making all kinds of guesses about what is without, right?

(Indeed I tell you, you are no entropist.)


"All cretins are liars. I am a cretin."

May you not conceive of this fellow, or does inference fail you yet once more?

[BADecker]

I asserted God to be the acme of "minimum entropy state."

We don't know that this is God. We don't even know that this is the crux of God. We have never seen something like minimum entropy in this universe. In fact, there may be no minimum entropy. That is, there might be such a thing as NO entropy.

God totally might be from elsewhere and else-when. He might be totally from somewhere that has nothing to do with entropy or lack of it, or any of the laws of this universe, whatsoever. In fact, if the universe is about 6,000 years old like the Bible says, God must have kick-started a whole lot of it into action after He set it in place. Being part of anything we know about this universe would make such a thing impossible.

The point? "... acme of 'minimum entropy state,'" is a good guess... another idea to consider. But probably there are aspects of God that are so extremely different than ANYTHING in this universe, that the word "different" is completely inapplicable.

Reconsidering, God would seem a minimum entropy state of existence (which isn't soley this mere universe).

How do we know? Maybe entropy or non-entropy doesn't apply to God. Maybe He just uses it. We hardly know what this universe is all about. How can we tell much of anything about God? Of course, I don't know that God isn't a minimum entropy state.

"...existence (which isn't solely this mere universe)."

I am not disagreeing. Yet, how can we use logic on something that is "un-logic," but uses logic at the same time?

(You're confusing "without" with "within.")

By inference, one may (to degree) arrive upon that without the rationally ineligible from it.

We are within what we are within. Since we are what we are, and since we don't know much about what we really are, let's start making all kinds of guesses about what is without, right?

(Indeed I tell you, you are no entropist.)

"All cretins are liars. I am a cretin."

You trying to tell me that I am God? 

[Lauda]

yeah right...
True statement: "we don't know"
Delusional statement: "it was God"

Curiously enough, God has no idea about the Universe, 99% of scientific assertions from religion are way wrong and attached to its time's belief. A more than sufficient evidence that "we" created God, not the other way around.

Very nicely said. Well there is a term for such people in philosophy but I can't seem to recall its name in English right now. I do believe however that this involves most people. They blindly accept the "truth" without even trying to find out if it is correct.
However it's quite interesting to see that the majority of the most intelligent people are either agnostics or atheists.

[username18333]

I asserted God to be the acme of "minimum entropy state."

We don't know that this is God. We don't even know that this is the crux of God. We have never seen something like minimum entropy in this universe. In fact, there may be no minimum entropy. That is, there might be such a thing as NO entropy.

God totally might be from elsewhere and else-when. He might be totally from somewhere that has nothing to do with entropy or lack of it, or any of the laws of this universe, whatsoever. In fact, if the universe is about 6,000 years old like the Bible says, God must have kick-started a whole lot of it into action after He set it in place. Being part of anything we know about this universe would make such a thing impossible.

The point? "... acme of 'minimum entropy state,'" is a good guess... another idea to consider. But probably there are aspects of God that are so extremely different than ANYTHING in this universe, that the word "different" is completely inapplicable.

Reconsidering, God would seem a minimum entropy state of existence (which isn't soley this mere universe).

How do we know? Maybe entropy or non-entropy doesn't apply to God. Maybe He just uses it. We hardly know what this universe is all about. How can we tell much of anything about God? Of course, I don't know that God isn't a minimum entropy state.

"...existence (which isn't solely this mere universe)."

I am not disagreeing. Yet, how can we use logic on something that is "un-logic," but uses logic at the same time?

(You're confusing "without" with "within.")

By inference, one may arrive upon a measure of that without rational intelligibility.

We are within what we are within. Since we are what we are, and since we don't know much about what we really are, let's start making all kinds of guesses about what is without, right?

(Indeed I tell you, you are no entropist.)


"All cretins are liars. I am a cretin."

May you not conceive of this fellow, or does inference fail you yet once more?

You trying to tell me that I am God?  

Wise men are instructed by reason;
Men of less understanding, by experience;
The most ignorant, by necessity;
The beasts by nature.

[BADecker]

I asserted God to be the acme of "minimum entropy state."

We don't know that this is God. We don't even know that this is the crux of God. We have never seen something like minimum entropy in this universe. In fact, there may be no minimum entropy. That is, there might be such a thing as NO entropy.

God totally might be from elsewhere and else-when. He might be totally from somewhere that has nothing to do with entropy or lack of it, or any of the laws of this universe, whatsoever. In fact, if the universe is about 6,000 years old like the Bible says, God must have kick-started a whole lot of it into action after He set it in place. Being part of anything we know about this universe would make such a thing impossible.

The point? "... acme of 'minimum entropy state,'" is a good guess... another idea to consider. But probably there are aspects of God that are so extremely different than ANYTHING in this universe, that the word "different" is completely inapplicable.

Reconsidering, God would seem a minimum entropy state of existence (which isn't soley this mere universe).

How do we know? Maybe entropy or non-entropy doesn't apply to God. Maybe He just uses it. We hardly know what this universe is all about. How can we tell much of anything about God? Of course, I don't know that God isn't a minimum entropy state.

"...existence (which isn't solely this mere universe)."

I am not disagreeing. Yet, how can we use logic on something that is "un-logic," but uses logic at the same time?

(You're confusing "without" with "within.")

By inference, one may arrive upon a measure of that without rational intelligibility.

We are within what we are within. Since we are what we are, and since we don't know much about what we really are, let's start making all kinds of guesses about what is without, right?

(Indeed I tell you, you are no entropist.)


"All cretins are liars. I am a cretin."

May you not conceive of this fellow, or does inference fail you yet once more?

You trying to tell me that I am God?  

Wise men are instructed by reason;
Men of less understanding, by experience;
The most ignorant, by necessity;
The beasts by nature.

The fear of the Lord—that is wisdom, and to shun evil is understanding.

The fear of the LORD is pure, enduring forever.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom; all who follow his precepts have good understanding.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.

The fear of the LORD adds length to life, but the years of the wicked are cut short.

The fear of the LORD is a fountain of life, turning a man from the snares of death

The fear of the LORD teaches a man wisdom, and humility comes before honor.

The fear of the LORD leads to life: Then one rests content, untouched by trouble.

Humility and the fear of the LORD bring wealth and honor and life.

He (God) will be the sure foundation for your times, a rich store of salvation and wisdom and knowledge; the fear of the LORD is the key to this treasure.

[username18333]

I asserted God to be the acme of "minimum entropy state."

We don't know that this is God. We don't even know that this is the crux of God. We have never seen something like minimum entropy in this universe. In fact, there may be no minimum entropy. That is, there might be such a thing as NO entropy.

God totally might be from elsewhere and else-when. He might be totally from somewhere that has nothing to do with entropy or lack of it, or any of the laws of this universe, whatsoever. In fact, if the universe is about 6,000 years old like the Bible says, God must have kick-started a whole lot of it into action after He set it in place. Being part of anything we know about this universe would make such a thing impossible.

The point? "... acme of 'minimum entropy state,'" is a good guess... another idea to consider. But probably there are aspects of God that are so extremely different than ANYTHING in this universe, that the word "different" is completely inapplicable.

Reconsidering, God would seem a minimum entropy state of existence (which isn't soley this mere universe).

How do we know? Maybe entropy or non-entropy doesn't apply to God. Maybe He just uses it. We hardly know what this universe is all about. How can we tell much of anything about God? Of course, I don't know that God isn't a minimum entropy state.

"...existence (which isn't solely this mere universe)."

I am not disagreeing. Yet, how can we use logic on something that is "un-logic," but uses logic at the same time?

(You're confusing "without" with "within.")

By inference, one may arrive upon a measure of that without rational intelligibility.

We are within what we are within. Since we are what we are, and since we don't know much about what we really are, let's start making all kinds of guesses about what is without, right?

(Indeed I tell you, you are no entropist.)


"All cretins are liars. I am a cretin."

May you not conceive of this fellow, or does inference fail you yet once more?

You trying to tell me that I am God?  

Wise men are instructed by reason;
Men of less understanding, by experience;
The most ignorant, by necessity;
The beasts by nature.

The fear of the Lord—that is wisdom, and to shun evil is understanding.

The fear of the LORD is pure, enduring forever.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom; all who follow his precepts have good understanding.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.

The fear of the LORD adds length to life, but the years of the wicked are cut short.

The fear of the LORD is a fountain of life, turning a man from the snares of death

The fear of the LORD teaches a man wisdom, and humility comes before honor.

The fear of the LORD leads to life: Then one rests content, untouched by trouble.

Humility and the fear of the LORD bring wealth and honor and life.

He (God) will be the sure foundation for your times, a rich store of salvation and wisdom and knowledge; the fear of the LORD is the key to this treasure.

It is but for dust that Fear could so sustain.

[BADecker]

I asserted God to be the acme of "minimum entropy state."

We don't know that this is God. We don't even know that this is the crux of God. We have never seen something like minimum entropy in this universe. In fact, there may be no minimum entropy. That is, there might be such a thing as NO entropy.

God totally might be from elsewhere and else-when. He might be totally from somewhere that has nothing to do with entropy or lack of it, or any of the laws of this universe, whatsoever. In fact, if the universe is about 6,000 years old like the Bible says, God must have kick-started a whole lot of it into action after He set it in place. Being part of anything we know about this universe would make such a thing impossible.

The point? "... acme of 'minimum entropy state,'" is a good guess... another idea to consider. But probably there are aspects of God that are so extremely different than ANYTHING in this universe, that the word "different" is completely inapplicable.

Reconsidering, God would seem a minimum entropy state of existence (which isn't soley this mere universe).

How do we know? Maybe entropy or non-entropy doesn't apply to God. Maybe He just uses it. We hardly know what this universe is all about. How can we tell much of anything about God? Of course, I don't know that God isn't a minimum entropy state.

"...existence (which isn't solely this mere universe)."

I am not disagreeing. Yet, how can we use logic on something that is "un-logic," but uses logic at the same time?

(You're confusing "without" with "within.")

By inference, one may arrive upon a measure of that without rational intelligibility.

We are within what we are within. Since we are what we are, and since we don't know much about what we really are, let's start making all kinds of guesses about what is without, right?

(Indeed I tell you, you are no entropist.)


"All cretins are liars. I am a cretin."

May you not conceive of this fellow, or does inference fail you yet once more?

You trying to tell me that I am God?  

Wise men are instructed by reason;
Men of less understanding, by experience;
The most ignorant, by necessity;
The beasts by nature.

The fear of the Lord—that is wisdom, and to shun evil is understanding.

The fear of the LORD is pure, enduring forever.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom; all who follow his precepts have good understanding.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.

The fear of the LORD adds length to life, but the years of the wicked are cut short.

The fear of the LORD is a fountain of life, turning a man from the snares of death

The fear of the LORD teaches a man wisdom, and humility comes before honor.

The fear of the LORD leads to life: Then one rests content, untouched by trouble.

Humility and the fear of the LORD bring wealth and honor and life.

He (God) will be the sure foundation for your times, a rich store of salvation and wisdom and knowledge; the fear of the LORD is the key to this treasure.

It is but for dust that Fear could so sustain.

It is the immense space between the subatomic particles of the atoms that shows that we are dust (at least physically), or even less than dust.

[RodeoX]

Wow, you guys are still talking about this. I think it's clear that if you build your world and philosophy around the idea of a god, you CAN'T accept science or anything else that would destroy your ego. Us non-believers need to understand that while it's easy to see that there is no god, it is asking a lot of believers to recognize the obvious. Its not just this one fact they have to accept. They must throw out all their notions about reality. Not everyone can do that.

[username18333]

I asserted God to be the acme of "minimum entropy state."

We don't know that this is God. We don't even know that this is the crux of God. We have never seen something like minimum entropy in this universe. In fact, there may be no minimum entropy. That is, there might be such a thing as NO entropy.

God totally might be from elsewhere and else-when. He might be totally from somewhere that has nothing to do with entropy or lack of it, or any of the laws of this universe, whatsoever. In fact, if the universe is about 6,000 years old like the Bible says, God must have kick-started a whole lot of it into action after He set it in place. Being part of anything we know about this universe would make such a thing impossible.

The point? "... acme of 'minimum entropy state,'" is a good guess... another idea to consider. But probably there are aspects of God that are so extremely different than ANYTHING in this universe, that the word "different" is completely inapplicable.

Reconsidering, God would seem a minimum entropy state of existence (which isn't soley this mere universe).

How do we know? Maybe entropy or non-entropy doesn't apply to God. Maybe He just uses it. We hardly know what this universe is all about. How can we tell much of anything about God? Of course, I don't know that God isn't a minimum entropy state.

"...existence (which isn't solely this mere universe)."

I am not disagreeing. Yet, how can we use logic on something that is "un-logic," but uses logic at the same time?

(You're confusing "without" with "within.")

By inference, one may arrive upon a measure of that without rational intelligibility.

We are within what we are within. Since we are what we are, and since we don't know much about what we really are, let's start making all kinds of guesses about what is without, right?

(Indeed I tell you, you are no entropist.)


"All cretins are liars. I am a cretin."

May you not conceive of this fellow, or does inference fail you yet once more?

You trying to tell me that I am God?  

Wise men are instructed by reason;
Men of less understanding, by experience;
The most ignorant, by necessity;
The beasts by nature.

The fear of the Lord—that is wisdom, and to shun evil is understanding.

The fear of the LORD is pure, enduring forever.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom; all who follow his precepts have good understanding.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.

The fear of the LORD adds length to life, but the years of the wicked are cut short.

The fear of the LORD is a fountain of life, turning a man from the snares of death

The fear of the LORD teaches a man wisdom, and humility comes before honor.

The fear of the LORD leads to life: Then one rests content, untouched by trouble.

Humility and the fear of the LORD bring wealth and honor and life.

He (God) will be the sure foundation for your times, a rich store of salvation and wisdom and knowledge; the fear of the LORD is the key to this treasure.

It is but for dust that Fear could so sustain.

It is the immense space between the subatomic particles of the atoms that shows that we are dust (at least physically), or even less than dust.

What physic' know you?

[BADecker]

Wow, you guys are still talking about this. I think it's clear that if you build your world and philosophy around the idea of a god, you CAN'T accept science or anything else that would destroy your ego. Us non-believers need to understand that while it's easy to see that there is no god, it is asking a lot of believers to recognize the obvious. Its not just this one fact they have to accept. They must throw out all their notions about reality. Not everyone can do that.

Actually, the only thing that maintains the ability to believe that there is no God is the freedom that God allows.

Close to proof for God:
1. Machine quality of the Universe; need a Machine-Maker that is not evident from the universe;
2. There is no such thing as pure random; random as we know it is a crutch to help us because of our weakness; evolution does not exist without God in no pure random;
3. Consciousness and conscience both suggest strongly that there is a God.

These things are evident. They are even scientifically evident. The only time science nullifies them is when people pick and choose the science they are going to use, and then interpret their science in ways that they want, ignoring the other interpretations.

[BADecker]

I asserted God to be the acme of "minimum entropy state."

We don't know that this is God. We don't even know that this is the crux of God. We have never seen something like minimum entropy in this universe. In fact, there may be no minimum entropy. That is, there might be such a thing as NO entropy.

God totally might be from elsewhere and else-when. He might be totally from somewhere that has nothing to do with entropy or lack of it, or any of the laws of this universe, whatsoever. In fact, if the universe is about 6,000 years old like the Bible says, God must have kick-started a whole lot of it into action after He set it in place. Being part of anything we know about this universe would make such a thing impossible.

The point? "... acme of 'minimum entropy state,'" is a good guess... another idea to consider. But probably there are aspects of God that are so extremely different than ANYTHING in this universe, that the word "different" is completely inapplicable.

Reconsidering, God would seem a minimum entropy state of existence (which isn't soley this mere universe).

How do we know? Maybe entropy or non-entropy doesn't apply to God. Maybe He just uses it. We hardly know what this universe is all about. How can we tell much of anything about God? Of course, I don't know that God isn't a minimum entropy state.

"...existence (which isn't solely this mere universe)."

I am not disagreeing. Yet, how can we use logic on something that is "un-logic," but uses logic at the same time?

(You're confusing "without" with "within.")

By inference, one may arrive upon a measure of that without rational intelligibility.

We are within what we are within. Since we are what we are, and since we don't know much about what we really are, let's start making all kinds of guesses about what is without, right?

(Indeed I tell you, you are no entropist.)


"All cretins are liars. I am a cretin."

May you not conceive of this fellow, or does inference fail you yet once more?

You trying to tell me that I am God?  

Wise men are instructed by reason;
Men of less understanding, by experience;
The most ignorant, by necessity;
The beasts by nature.

The fear of the Lord—that is wisdom, and to shun evil is understanding.

The fear of the LORD is pure, enduring forever.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom; all who follow his precepts have good understanding.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.

The fear of the LORD adds length to life, but the years of the wicked are cut short.

The fear of the LORD is a fountain of life, turning a man from the snares of death

The fear of the LORD teaches a man wisdom, and humility comes before honor.

The fear of the LORD leads to life: Then one rests content, untouched by trouble.

Humility and the fear of the LORD bring wealth and honor and life.

He (God) will be the sure foundation for your times, a rich store of salvation and wisdom and knowledge; the fear of the LORD is the key to this treasure.

It is but for dust that Fear could so sustain.

It is the immense space between the subatomic particles of the atoms that shows that we are dust (at least physically), or even less than dust.

What physic' know you?

It's old stuff, from decades ago. 

[username18333]

Wow, you guys are still talking about this. I think it's clear that if you build your world and philosophy around the idea of a god, you CAN'T accept science or anything else that would destroy your ego. Us non-believers need to understand that while it's easy to see that there is no god, it is asking a lot of believers to recognize the obvious. Its not just this one fact they have to accept. They must throw out all their notions about reality. Not everyone can do that.

Actually, the only thing that maintains the ability to believe that there is no God is the freedom that God allows.

Close to proof for God:
1. Machine quality of the Universe; need a Machine-Maker that is not evident from the universe;
2. There is no such thing as pure random; random as we know it is a crutch to help us because of our weakness; evolution does not exist without God in no pure random;
3. Consciousness and conscience both suggest strongly that there is a God.

These things are evident. They are even scientifically evident. The only time science nullifies them is when people pick and choose the science they are going to use, and then interpret their science in ways that they want, ignoring the other interpretations.

See "Talk Origins" posts bellow.

You are still debating a mythological figure whose only proof of existence is a book that must be considered true because that book itself says so?! 

How about we start to discuss unicorns and minotaurs now?

See that following:

(The second segment of emboldened text was highlighted by "cooldgamer.")

So Dicksperiment, any proof of those 50btc you own?   

Yeah, Decky. Take Vod on his honor, and send him the bitcoins. He'll send 'em back if he loses.   

He asked him to sign the address, not send him the coins

On topic: no matter how much you guys debate how entropy works, it still doesn't prove there is a god.  Seems to be the latest buzzword for trying to disprove evolution, even though scientists have already debunked that idea.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/thermo.html

You missed a detail of our conversation. (See the emboldened portion.)

Boil glass of water, colouring will stick to sides.

By what means shall you boil such that you do not introduce "new disorder" into yourself (as per the requirements)?

Ok, I'll sit it out knowing the water will evaporate, and leave the colouring behind. I promise not to touch it

That introduces new disorder into the environment, the diffusion of the water molecules through the atmosphere.

You introduced this disorder, not I, I just sat and fell asleep watching it.. remember your up against someone who will get to the truth of the matter, in that you chose water, knowing it would evaporate of it's own accord, I had no say in this scientific fact, I merely debunked the question, using nothing.

Edit: twas a good question, you had me thinking, but it is also an invalid question with regards to your point, due to the fact you forgot water is constantly changing.

That "constant change" illustrates (part of) my point: entropy does, indeed, proceed towards a maximum.

What was then to be argued is that existence is an isolated system and, therefore, subject to the maximization of entropy, and that this "maximization" begets the manifestation of everything (not read: "everything that exists" [though, that's technically accurate]).

By thermodynamics, existence, which is an isolated system, would "spontaneously evolve towards thermodynamic equilibrium, the configuration with maximum entropy" (Wikipedia).

Nothing, then, is lost to everything.

It is to be inferred from there that God necessarily exists.

In a closed system entropy does increase, buuut...

However, they neglect the fact that life is not a closed system. The sun provides more than enough energy to drive things. If a mature tomato plant can have more usable energy than the seed it grew from, why should anyone expect that the next generation of tomatoes can't have more usable energy still? Creationists sometimes try to get around this by claiming that the information carried by living things lets them create order. However, not only is life irrelevant to the 2nd law, but order from disorder is common in nonliving systems, too. Snowflakes, sand dunes, tornadoes, stalactites, graded river beds, and lightning are just a few examples of order coming from disorder in nature; none require an intelligent program to achieve that order. In any nontrivial system with lots of energy flowing through it, you are almost certain to find order arising somewhere in the system. If order from disorder is supposed to violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics, why is it ubiquitous in nature?

That demonstrates my final assertion above: God would be the ultimate manifestation of that order within existence.

I misunderstood your argument, my bad.  You are simply using the god of the gaps.  There are many ways that the minimum entropy state could have come about, and since we don't know you're throwing god in there.

For example, the big crunch theory:

In physical cosmology, the Big Crunch is one possible scenario for the ultimate fate of the universe, in which the metric expansion of space eventually reverses and the universe recollapses, ultimately ending as a black hole singularity or causing a reformation of the universe starting with another big bang.

I asserted God to be the acme of "minimum entropy state."

[RodeoX]

Actually, the only thing that maintains the ability to believe that there is no God is the freedom that God allows.

Close to proof for God:
1. Machine quality of the Universe; need a Machine-Maker that is not evident from the universe;
2. There is no such thing as pure random; random as we know it is a crutch to help us because of our weakness; evolution does not exist without God in no pure random;
3. Consciousness and conscience both suggest strongly that there is a God.

These things are evident. They are even scientifically evident. The only time science nullifies them is when people pick and choose the science they are going to use, and then interpret their science in ways that they want, ignoring the other interpretations.

I just don't think those premisses are true.
The universe is in no way machine like. At the small scale it is super weird and follows none of the physical laws that govern machines.
I don't understand the non-random comment? Are random numbers not random?
Lastly, I see no suggestion that because I am conscious there must be a God?

It doesn't mean there is no god, but that's like saying that a dinosaur might live under my bed. He is a disappearing dinosaur, so when you look at him he vanishes. Now, try proving that a disappearing dinosaur is NOT under my bed.

[BADecker]

This thread is really growing. 

[BADecker]

Actually, the only thing that maintains the ability to believe that there is no God is the freedom that God allows.

Close to proof for God:
1. Machine quality of the Universe; need a Machine-Maker that is not evident from the universe;
2. There is no such thing as pure random; random as we know it is a crutch to help us because of our weakness; evolution does not exist without God in no pure random;
3. Consciousness and conscience both suggest strongly that there is a God.

These things are evident. They are even scientifically evident. The only time science nullifies them is when people pick and choose the science they are going to use, and then interpret their science in ways that they want, ignoring the other interpretations.

I just don't think those premisses are true.
The universe is in no way machine like. At the small scale it is super weird and follows none of the physical laws that govern machines.

Not a simple machine, no. Not even a machine like a complicated car engine, or a computer. Rather, machines upon machines using all the machines and lever actions of machines, inside one gigantic machine we call the universe.

I don't understand the non-random comment? Are random numbers not random?

Random numbers are not random. There is no such thing as random. For example, a computer that generates random numbers does so based on the identification number of the computer. But even if it doesn't, there are certain charges across the chips that CAUSE certain activity, resulting in a number that we call random. It is all cause and effect, action and reaction. We think that it is random because we don't see the forces at play causing the reaction.

Right back to the beginning of the universe, something CAUSED the universe to exist. This CAUSE set up the actions which would cause reactions which would cause other reactions, right down to the present. In other words, the whole universe is programmed.

All science looks at why things happen, what causes them to happen the way they do. The greater the scientist, the more he is able to figure out the cause behind the "things" or reactions that he is examining.

It is mind boggling, I know. But everything is pre-programmed.

Whatever programmed this universe, THAT is God. Is it the Big Bang? Is it a Being/Entity? Science hasn't told us yet, what God is. The universe is too complex. We need to go somewhere else for the answer, like, maybe God has left us a message.

Lastly, I see no suggestion that because I am conscious there must be a God?

The way that consciousness and conscience prove God, is something that is detailed. If you seriously want to see how it works, study more on the subject.

It doesn't mean there is no god, but that's like saying that a dinosaur might live under my bed. He is a disappearing dinosaur, so when you look at him he vanishes. Now, try proving that a disappearing dinosaur is NOT under my bed.

[cooldgamer]

Wow, you guys are still talking about this. I think it's clear that if you build your world and philosophy around the idea of a god, you CAN'T accept science or anything else that would destroy your ego. Us non-believers need to understand that while it's easy to see that there is no god, it is asking a lot of believers to recognize the obvious. Its not just this one fact they have to accept. They must throw out all their notions about reality. Not everyone can do that.

Actually, the only thing that maintains the ability to believe that there is no God is the freedom that God allows.

Close to proof for God:
1. Machine quality of the Universe; need a Machine-Maker that is not evident from the universe;
2. There is no such thing as pure random; random as we know it is a crutch to help us because of our weakness; evolution does not exist without God in no pure random;
3. Consciousness and conscience both suggest strongly that there is a God.

These things are evident. They are even scientifically evident. The only time science nullifies them is when people pick and choose the science they are going to use, and then interpret their science in ways that they want, ignoring the other interpretations.

1: No it doesn't, if the universe wasn't in a state to support life the way it happened then we wouldn't be here to comment on it.  Fine-tuned universe fallacy

2: Doesn't make any sense

3: No they don't, they suggest that we are conscience

[BADecker]

Wow, you guys are still talking about this. I think it's clear that if you build your world and philosophy around the idea of a god, you CAN'T accept science or anything else that would destroy your ego. Us non-believers need to understand that while it's easy to see that there is no god, it is asking a lot of believers to recognize the obvious. Its not just this one fact they have to accept. They must throw out all their notions about reality. Not everyone can do that.

Actually, the only thing that maintains the ability to believe that there is no God is the freedom that God allows.

Close to proof for God:
1. Machine quality of the Universe; need a Machine-Maker that is not evident from the universe;
2. There is no such thing as pure random; random as we know it is a crutch to help us because of our weakness; evolution does not exist without God in no pure random;
3. Consciousness and conscience both suggest strongly that there is a God.

These things are evident. They are even scientifically evident. The only time science nullifies them is when people pick and choose the science they are going to use, and then interpret their science in ways that they want, ignoring the other interpretations.

1: No it doesn't, if the universe wasn't in a state to support life the way it happened then we wouldn't be here to comment on it.  Fine-tuned universe fallacy

2: Doesn't make any sense

3: No they don't, they suggest that we are conscience

As long as you keep a narrow mind, or limit yourself to simple thinking, you won't ever understand.

Since you obviously don't understand, who is the leader of your religion that has convinced you into believing the things that you DO believe? I mean, you obviously don't know it through understanding it. So you must have someone who has convinced you of it without understanding. Is he/she your high priest(ess) of your religion?

[Lauda]

1: No it doesn't, if the universe wasn't in a state to support life the way it happened then we wouldn't be here to comment on it.  Fine-tuned universe fallacy

2: Doesn't make any sense

3: No they don't, they suggest that we are conscience

As long as you keep a narrow mind, or limit yourself to simple thinking, you won't ever understand.

This is exactly what you've been doing judged by reading your posts.
Random doesn't exist because humans claim that it doesn't exist and yes your 2nd point makes no sense at all.

Since you like this 'machine theory', maybe we are all just part of a Big simulation run on a machine (i.e. computer) by some smarter beings maybe even Gods?