• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

The need to concur on how to prove God exists or not.

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

TheELF

Diamond Member
Dec 22, 2012
3,120
323
126
Well, now you are just acting like a religious fanatic.
Just because you can prove that something happened through science doesn't mean God doesn't exists,it also doesn't automatically turn you into an atheist.
But replacing one theory with another isn't even prove,scientists don't know for a fact that this is how the universe started, they believe it happened like this the same way that religious people believe in their option, without any real proof,what scientists are basically saying is "it just happened" just like religious people say that "God always existed" both are theories that are impossible to prove or disprove, you need to believe in them.
And even if you would be able to prove that the universe started because quantum potential collapsed how do you prove or disprove that God didn't collapse it?!
You are arguing that the universe makes sense so it can't be made by God but nobody ever claimed God to be nonsensical,I hope at least.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
67,632
2,743
126
Well, now you are just acting like a religious fanatic.
Just because you can prove that something happened through science doesn't mean God doesn't exists,it also doesn't automatically turn you into an atheist.
But replacing one theory with another isn't even prove,scientists don't know for a fact that this is how the universe started, they believe it happened like this the same way that religious people believe in their option, without any real proof,what scientists are basically saying is "it just happened" just like religious people say that "God always existed" both are theories that are impossible to prove or disprove, you need to believe in them.
And even if you would be able to prove that the universe started because quantum potential collapsed how do you prove or disprove that God didn't collapse it?!
You are arguing that the universe makes sense so it can't be made by God but nobody ever claimed God to be nonsensical,I hope at least.
They are no remotely the same. What we Know of the Universe implies the Singularity.
 

Mai72

Lifer
Sep 12, 2012
10,002
843
126
Well, now you are just acting like a religious fanatic.
Just because you can prove that something happened through science doesn't mean God doesn't exists,it also doesn't automatically turn you into an atheist.
But replacing one theory with another isn't even prove,scientists don't know for a fact that this is how the universe started, they believe it happened like this the same way that religious people believe in their option, without any real proof,what scientists are basically saying is "it just happened" just like religious people say that "God always existed" both are theories that are impossible to prove or disprove, you need to believe in them.
And even if you would be able to prove that the universe started because quantum potential collapsed how do you prove or disprove that God didn't collapse it?!
You are arguing that the universe makes sense so it can't be made by God but nobody ever claimed God to be nonsensical,I hope at least.
When I think of God I don't think of the old guy with a beard hovering up in the sky. This is how many in the west think about god though. We just don't know though. People will say that the universe was constructed perfectly so god must exist. But, is the universe perfect? There are black holes. The sun is going to implode in the far distant future. People love to think of this afterlife because most have a difficult time letting go. Detaching. It's why you often hear from christains of this afterlife where your loved ones are waiting.

The truth is no one knows what happens after death.
 

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
12,868
2,384
126
But replacing one theory with another isn't even prove,scientists don't know for a fact that this is how the universe started, they believe it happened like this the same way that religious people believe in their option, without any real proof,what scientists are basically saying is "it just happened" just like religious people say that "God always existed" both are theories that are impossible to prove or disprove, you need to believe in them.
We do have evidence of the big bang theory. We have a model that makes predictions, and we can look out into the universe and find the things that it predicts. That is proof. Science is not just opinion. Where ever did you get that idea?
Can we prove it to a mathematical certainty? No. But almost nothing can be. But that is not anywhere near the same as religion.

And even if you would be able to prove that the universe started because quantum potential collapsed how do you prove or disprove that God didn't collapse it?!
We can't. The big bang theory states how the universe started and says nothing about what happened before it did.

The problem with the 'Well God' answer though is that I could literally replace anything at all and it would be exactly as valid. Maybe the quantum potential collapse was actually caused by a whale fart that traveled backwards in time. Literally just as valid a argument as 'god did it'. You need to provide some reason why it would be god and not the infinite number of other possible solutions.

When you have a theory that can be neither tested and has no predictive value, it is worthless. Every scientific theory has at least one of those two qualities. That is what is missing in your argument.
 

Marius Dejess

Senior member
Sep 7, 2015
251
27
101
Example of what? Not being able to prove something doesn't exist?

[ . . . ]

.

Dear Smog, you in effect admit you cannot give an example of this statement from you, below in bold and in italic:

"We can not really ever prove the non-existence of a thing."

That is a most overwhelming statement of a most definitive insistence from your part.

How about you give an example?

.

Here, I will give you an example that man can prove something to not exist, like say a unicorn, this way:

I bring you with me to my attic, telling you that we will search for a unicorn in the whole attic, and we will not find one there, wherefore: that is proving a negative, no unicorn existing.


What about your contention that the party making a claim has the burden to prove his claim, and not the party opposing the claim, is that another rule in your toolkit, in your practice of argumentation and debate?

.
 

UsandThem

Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 4, 2000
13,304
3,957
146
I bring you with me to my attic, telling you that we will search for a unicorn in the whole attic, and we will not find one there, wherefore: that is proving a negative, no unicorn existing.
Mind blown.

I always pegged you as more of "Bring you to my basement" type.

11.gif
 
Last edited:

Iron Woode

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 10, 1999
27,150
5,377
126
I bring you with me to my attic, telling you that we will search for a unicorn in the whole attic, and we will not find one there, wherefore: that is proving a negative, no unicorn existing.
This is how you get on an FBI watch-list.

You are a creeper and should be ashamed of yourself. Seek forgiveness from whatever God you choose to worship.
 

TheELF

Diamond Member
Dec 22, 2012
3,120
323
126
We do have evidence of the big bang theory.
...
The big bang theory
Yup,it's still a theory because we have no proof.
We have a model that makes predictions, and we can look out into the universe and find the things that it predicts. That is proof. Science is not just opinion. Where ever did you get that idea?
Where ever did I promote that idea? I called it a theory because that's what it is,you called it a theory as well
And no a theory based on a model is not proof.
We can't. The big bang theory states how the universe started and says nothing about what happened before it did.
And yet somehow we should take it for a fact that quantum phainomena existed before time and space and anything got created.
The problem with the 'Well God' answer though is that I could literally replace anything at all and it would be exactly as valid. Maybe the quantum potential collapse was actually caused by a whale fart that traveled backwards in time. Literally just as valid a argument as 'god did it'. You need to provide some reason why it would be god and not the infinite number of other possible solutions.
Yes that is very much exactly the issue,science replaced it with quantum because that's what's hip right now (it's the best explanation we have anyway) ,back in the 30's scientists put radioactive material into beauty products and antiques and made shoe fitting devices with x-rays because back then that was the newest and coolest.
Quantum that went back in time (or is eternal) is just as unproven as cow fart that went back in time, at this moment quantum is much more possible but that does not make it any more proven.
When you have a theory that can be neither tested and has no predictive value, it is worthless. Every scientific theory has at least one of those two qualities. That is what is missing in your argument.
My argument was:
" Just because you can prove that something happened through science doesn't mean God doesn't exists,it also doesn't automatically turn you into an atheist. "
This can be tested extremely easily,just ask an extremely religious person to ad 2 and 2 together by means other than praying for the solution and see if he(she/it) turns atheist.
All the rest of my post is me trying to show that we have no actual real proof for either God or the big bang.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
67,632
2,743
126
Yup,it's still a theory because we have no proof.

Where ever did I promote that idea? I called it a theory because that's what it is,you called it a theory as well
And no a theory based on a model is not proof.

And yet somehow we should take it for a fact that quantum phainomena existed before time and space and anything got created.

Yes that is very much exactly the issue,science replaced it with quantum because that's what's hip right now (it's the best explanation we have anyway) ,back in the 30's scientists put radioactive material into beauty products and antiques and made shoe fitting devices with x-rays because back then that was the newest and coolest.
Quantum that went back in time (or is eternal) is just as unproven as cow fart that went back in time, at this moment quantum is much more possible but that does not make it any more proven.

My argument was:
" Just because you can prove that something happened through science doesn't mean God doesn't exists,it also doesn't automatically turn you into an atheist. "
This can be tested extremely easily,just ask an extremely religious person to ad 2 and 2 together by means other than praying for the solution and see if he(she/it) turns atheist.
All the rest of my post is me trying to show that we have no actual real proof for either God or the big bang.
Learn what a Scientific Theory is before dismissing Theories again.

Link
 

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
80,453
7,279
126
Yup,it's still a theory because we have no proof.

Where ever did I promote that idea? I called it a theory because that's what it is,you called it a theory as well
And no a theory based on a model is not proof.

And yet somehow we should take it for a fact that quantum phainomena existed before time and space and anything got created.

Yes that is very much exactly the issue,science replaced it with quantum because that's what's hip right now (it's the best explanation we have anyway) ,back in the 30's scientists put radioactive material into beauty products and antiques and made shoe fitting devices with x-rays because back then that was the newest and coolest.
Quantum that went back in time (or is eternal) is just as unproven as cow fart that went back in time, at this moment quantum is much more possible but that does not make it any more proven.

My argument was:
" Just because you can prove that something happened through science doesn't mean God doesn't exists,it also doesn't automatically turn you into an atheist. "
This can be tested extremely easily,just ask an extremely religious person to ad 2 and 2 together by means other than praying for the solution and see if he(she/it) turns atheist.
All the rest of my post is me trying to show that we have no actual real proof for either God or the big bang.

Tell me how you made it out of high school.
 
Last edited:

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
25,299
970
126
I bring you with me to my attic, telling you that we will search for a unicorn in the whole attic, and we will not find one there, wherefore: that is proving a negative, no unicorn existing.
Everybody knows the unicorns live along the edge of the flat earth.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: skyking

Marius Dejess

Senior member
Sep 7, 2015
251
27
101
Time for a reset of this my thread, here it is, see the quote below under the caption, [For your orientation].
________________


For this morning, here is my challenge to everyone:

The fact that you and I and he she it, we all exist, that is the proof on evidence that God exists, in concept as the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.



[For your orientation]

Title of thread: The need to concur on how to prove God exists or not.

Thread starter: Marius Dejess
Start date: Jun 7, 2016


Post #1

There is endless debate over God existing or not.

But there is no talk at all about how to concur on what it is or how to prove or disprove that something at all exists in objective reality outside of concepts in our mind.

I think I can and do so prove for myself that God exists, and you can also if you will concur with me on how to prove that something at all exists in objective reality outside of concepts in our mind.

Here is step No. 1 in proving or disproving that something at all, be it the nose in our face or God existing in objective reality outside of concepts in our mind:

No. 1 Parties engaged in proving or disproving something to exist must first work to concur on the concept of the thing, anything at all be it the nose in our face or God, otherwise it is an insane exchange of thoughts because parties will be talking past each other's head, and that is not communication at all or getting connected at all.

What do you guys here say?

When you accept my step No. 1, then I will or you guys here can propose step No. 2 for us all to work on to concur on it.
.
 

Iron Woode

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 10, 1999
27,150
5,377
126
Right?

I have a Star Wars Blue-ray, therefore that is proof that God exists.

That probably won't happen until we stop indulging them, and they go bot somewhere else. :p
I think the God-bot is starting to understand that we don't care about it's religious mumbo-jumbo.
 

UsandThem

Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 4, 2000
13,304
3,957
146
I think the God-bot is starting to understand that we don't care about it's religious mumbo-jumbo.
If this was a legitimate person discussing their beliefs, I wouldn't even be in the thread. I have no problems with people's religious beliefs.

However, when a bot posts nonsense over and over like this one has, it's annoying. You don't create a thread saying you have "proof" when you don't have proof, and then proceed to post nonsensical ramblings about unicorns in the attic. :p
 

Iron Woode

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 10, 1999
27,150
5,377
126
If this was a legitimate person discussing their beliefs, I wouldn't even be in the thread. I have no problems with people's religious beliefs.

However, when a bot posts nonsense over and over like this one has, it's annoying. You don't create a thread saying you have "proof" when you don't have proof, and then proceed to post nonsensical ramblings about unicorns in the attic. :p
maybe the code is corrupting? Did you read the nonsense it posted in the other thread?
 

Marius Dejess

Senior member
Sep 7, 2015
251
27
101
Are you [anyone here] an atheist?

Good!

Tell me something you want me to know about just one thought that matters a lot to you with calling yourself an atheist.



.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY