evidence for god? some one said so.

Great Debates
1

the only evidence for gods existence is someone told you he does.

well that and the part of our monkey mind that is too stupid to separate fact from fiction,
truth from a well told lie, and reality from the world inside our self deluded brains.

before we start there are a few things that need to be cleared up, first off the scientific method
if you don’t actually know what this is and cannot be arsed to click the link then don’t bother posting please.
Ignorance will be fought this day and the last thing we need is anignorantfool0511 posting ignorant foolishness in this thread.

also before providing evidence for the existance of god, God, GAWD, Thor, Raven, Spider Man, or any other fictional characters
please make sure you are neither blinded by your own https://www.google.com/search?q=cognitive+bias+list+wikipedia&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS488US488&aq=f&oq=cog&aqs=chrome.3.59j57j65j59j0j60.4920&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8"]Bias or deluded into thinking your https://www.google.com/search?q=argumentative+fallacies&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS488US488&aq=f&oq=arg&aqs=chrome.0.59j57j59j0j61j60.18210&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8"]fallacies are true

any evidence to be provided for the existance of anything from the realm of the supernatural must conform to
basic scientific standards for “evidence” i.e. it must be testable, as in outside of your skull and within
the realm of reality that others have access to it and can repeat the test you used to produce said evidence.

every argument for god starts with an assumption, the assumtion that god exists. where does the evidence to support
this assumption come from?

the bible? its a book. if the bible is proof of gods existence then Dune is proof that the Freemen exist.
Mickey Mouse is real, Smurfs really are running from Gargamel.

what about the unmoved mover? the cause that started it all? you got this idea from the bible…and we have
already discussed it, the bible is still proof of nothing.

the world is so perfect for human existence, we are so perfectly made. god did it!
again this idea originates in the bible (well that and everyone else who thought of it first) the worlds is
not perfect for human existence, 200 years ago if you made it to the age of 21 you were the 1 in 3 to do so.
as for us being well made, thousands of genetic diseases and disorders, wisdom teeth, the appendix, need I really go on?

the reality is this, if you strip away all of the preconceptions you have thanks you years of indoctrination
into your religion of birth you are left with a very simple conclusion, there is no evidence, of any kind, at all, to support your
belief. the spiritual is a lie, your pastor/preacher/minister/bishop? those guys have a
very strong financial incentive to keep you believing and thus paying for their living expenses.
having reached the conclusion that your entire system of belief is based purely on the irrational you must come to the next conclusion.
continued belief in the irrational is not sane. if you believe that it rains doughnuts every sunday, you are not sane.
just because billions share your insanity does not make you any less insane. if every person on this planet tomorrow decided that the
sun was made of marshmallows and chocolate sauce then every person on this planet would be delusional.

after all that the debate is basically two fold, first am I right or wrong? and if I am wrong can you follow the rules laid out by science to prove it?
the second? never mind, lets leave it at the first.

the one real rule I would like to enforce, if you make a claim for god based on
evidence, you had better back up that claim, and when you get called on your fallicy
don’t start dancing the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance"]Cognitive Dissonance conga line.

(a final note, for those about to say the scientific method cant explain this or that or the other thing? neither can you, keep in mind that you are alive today because of science, the food you eat, the clothes you wear, the house you sleep in, the roads, the internet, your phone/pc/alarm clock/tampons/medicine/every single aspect of your existence outside of the most trivial aspects, has been brought to you by the wonders of science, if you want to live otherwise you are going to have to take of all your clothes, walk out into the forest, and start eating berries and hunting bare handed to survive, good luck with that.

2

I’d have a slightly easier time taking you seriously if you used capital letters once in awhile to start sentences.

Stop the presses! Another atheist trying to use science to prove God doesn’t exist. Nevermind that it’s impossible to prove a negative. Has it ever occurred to you that God and the scientific method can coexist, and that the very definition of “faith” in God or anything else is “belief without proof”?

3

There’s nothing like a poorly-formatted screed to bring light and understanding.

4

first of all I am not trying to prove god doesn’t exist, second proving a negative is trivially simple under 2 conditions
1 the proposed “positive” (god) is absurd on its face.
2 the proposer of said positive is both reasonable and honest
leading me to believe that every person using this particular fallacy is not being particularly honest.

instead of saying you can’t prove god doesn’t exist lets try this, you prove that there isn’t a planet full of emerald based life forms that have diamonds for eyes coal for brains and muscles made up of liquid water. they look like us, speak perfect english with an American accent and drive around town in BMW’s, Volvo’s, and Toyota’s while eating Wonder bread and smoking Marlborough’s. they have kids named things like Mike and Jennifer, a dog named spot and a cat named shadow.

the above is absurd on its face, but you cannot prove it false to me so long as I refused to accept that absurdity.

as to god and the scientific method, no they cannot coexist, as to faith? did you actually read the op?

5

I hate when you hit post instead of preview
here are the messed up links from the op
Bias
fallacy
cognitive dissonance

6

Not very well. Belief in God requires ignoring all sorts of physical laws, as well as the habits of thought that make practicing science possible. The only reason there are any religious scientists is because of how good humans are at compartmentalization. Science and religion corrode each other by their nature, and can only “coexist” by being kept separate; something that typically works imperfectly at best.

7

Not completely correct, belief in some (probably most) Gods require ignoring physical laws. Deists can happily carry on doing science without troubling their religious beliefs for example.

Critical1 your OP is poorly written, in parts incoherent even, and lacks basic grammar. If you want to debate please consider improving your writing.

8

Consider the relationship between dogs and humans. Dogs are not capable of understanding why or how humans do things. Turning lights on and off, for example, is a miracle to a dog. Now if there is a being so much superior to a dog, it is not such a stretch to accept that there could be a being that much superior to humans.

Dog is to man as man is to god.

Could it it be merely coincidental that dog is god spelled backward?

Continuing the analogy, the status of humans to a god might be no better than that of a favored pet…

9

Let’s eat him then. :smiley:

10

Given that the Old Testament was written in Hebrew, I’d say that’s a big yes.

11

Bah! It was translated into Hebrew after being dictated in English by the white, blond Son of God! Everybody knows that!

12

I’m never sure just what is being proven when anyone “proves” god doesn’t exist. It is either obvious or you are a beliver of some kind. Just call yourself an atheist and be done with it as you don’t have to convert other atheists and I doubt your brillant words will convince any others.

PS, Get your shift key fixed.

13

So what is the Hebrew word for “dog” and what would the reverse of that be, smartypants?:stuck_out_tongue:

14

I only read the first paragraph of the OP.

critical1, such poorly written gargage is inconsiderate at best. Those of us who read a lot find it annoying and unnecessarily difficult to read things such as that.

15

Make that “garbage”, not gargage.:smack:

16

Is anybody trying to do that in this thread? The OP is hard to read, but it seems to be simply calling for people to provide evidence for god, which the OP wants to refute.

17

my writing style sucks, got it. does anyone have anything to actually add to the op or should we change this thread into a critique? (note I really wouldn’t mind) otherwise we are left with this

sure, there could be, but without evidence of any kind it is a huge stretch. once again you are making an assumption based on what?

18

There is evidence for the God that I believe in, because I use the notion of “God” to label all those properties of the universe which are not provable, and the existence of the non-provable has been proven. Gödel’s incompleteness theorems

19

And cue the pantheist (a) with evidence for the God he believes in, and (b) who uses the notion of “God” to label all those properties of the universe, full stop.

20

And I believe that cats can fly, because I consider all furry creatures to be cats.