# Present evidence for the existence of your deity **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 23, 2012, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737 "2012-04-23T19:45:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![TravisT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ea5d25/32.png) [@TravisT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TravisT)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/261 "2012-04-24T20:52:38Z")
Again, I know there are a lot more quantum physicists who denounce the claims offered by Dr. Goswani but I found it very interesting. Just because the majority of scientists say one thing, doesn’t make it so. Let’s look at Capurnicus, he too was the minority in his day. So No this isn’t proof, but someone with some credentials is looking into and offering evidence. He’s no crack pot. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/262 "2012-04-24T20:54:59Z")
> [@GEEPERS](#): > > How about providing some cites for your claims, or should I take your suggestive errors at face value? You need a citation that the idea of people returning to their ancestral homes for a tax census is absurd? > [@](#): > > How about providing some cites for your claims, or should I take your suggestive errors at face value? Again, the irony! > [@](#): > > Christian apologists certainly have not run away from any of your challenges. > From a quick google search: This list includes two alternate theories (the levirate marriage and the inheritance, although I have no idea why the Jews would care about that) and three theories that involve either an error in the Bible or an admission that at least one of the genealogies is made up. That doesn’t do much to advance your claim about the Bible being historical and Jesus’ lineage being accurate. > [@](#): > > Frankly, I’m more amazed at the numerous Messianic prophecies in the OT that came completely true with the life and death of Jesus Christ. Of course you are. You do overlook everything else. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/263 "2012-04-24T20:56:40Z")
> [@TravisT](#): > > Again, I know there are a lot more quantum physicists who denounce the claims offered by Dr. Goswani but I found it very interesting. Just because the majority of scientists say one thing, doesn’t make it so. Let’s look at Capurnicus, he too was the minority in his day. So No this isn’t proof, but someone with some credentials is looking into and offering evidence. He’s no crack pot. I have to admit that exchanges like this sets off some alarms: > [@](#): > > WIE: That’s fascinating. Would most physicists agree with that interpretation of his experiment? > > AG: Well, physicists must agree with this interpretation of this experiment. Many times of course, physicists will take the following point of view: they will say, “Well, yeah sure, experiments. But this relationship between particles really isn’t important. We mustn’t look into any of the consequences of this transcendent domain—if it can even be interpreted that way.” In other words, they try to minimize the impact of this and still try to hold on to the idea that matter is supreme. > > But in their heart they know, as is very evidenced. In 1984 or '85, at the American Physical Society meeting at which I was present, it is said that one physicist was heard saying to another physicist that, after Aspect’s experiment, anyone who does not believe that something is really strange about the world must have rocks in his head. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/264 "2012-04-24T20:57:28Z")
“Goswami is convinced, along with a number of others who subscribe to the same view, that the universe, in order to exist, requires a conscious sentient being to be aware of it.” Then…where did the first conscious sentient being come from? This looks like a fairly commonplace re-casting of the typical Medieval proofs of God’s existence. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/265 "2012-04-24T20:59:40Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > “Goswami is convinced, along with a number of others who subscribe to the same view, that the universe, in order to exist, requires a conscious sentient being to be aware of it.” > > Then…where did the first conscious sentient being come from? > > This looks like a fairly commonplace re-casting of the typical Medieval proofs of God’s existence. It also suggests that, at some time in the past, God was unconscious. Interesting. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/266 "2012-04-24T21:04:49Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > It also suggests that, at some time in the past, God was unconscious. Interesting. Which just goes to show that you should always let sleeping gods lie. ---
**Author:** ![TATG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/50afbb/32.png) [@TATG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TATG)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/267 "2012-04-24T21:27:36Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > “Goswami is convinced, along with a number of others who subscribe to the same view, that the universe, in order to exist, requires a conscious sentient being to be aware of it.” > > Then…where did the first conscious sentient being come from? He says “exist”, not “create”, so I don’t know how that is supposed to be an objection. What if I say that, the universe, in order to exist, requires that something exist; would you ask “where did the first thing come from”? > [@Trinopus](#): > > This looks like a fairly commonplace re-casting of the typical Medieval proofs of God’s existence. Given what you say above, I presume you mean the cosmological arguments. I would say it doesn’t, but it looks similar in type to Berkeley’s position. ---
**Author:** ![TravisT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ea5d25/32.png) [@TravisT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TravisT)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/268 "2012-04-24T21:36:03Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > “Goswami is convinced, along with a number of others who subscribe to the same view, that the universe, in order to exist, requires a conscious sentient being to be aware of it.” > > Then…where did the first conscious sentient being come from? > > This looks like a fairly commonplace re-casting of the typical Medieval proofs of God’s existence. I didn’t realize they did scientific experiments into quantum machanics in Medieval times. Interesting. Also the idea that outside of the multiverse there exists something from which the sentient being existed before and that the universe is simply its dream made real, allows for it to come from some place. It’s the snake eating its tail argument though. That’s the mystery. Where did it all really begin, if there existed something before the universe? My point is you asked for evidence and I would suggest this is on some level a tiny piece of evidence. The case of course isn’t solved, but… ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/269 "2012-04-24T21:38:41Z")
> [@TravisT](#): > > I didn’t realize they did scientific experiments into quantum machanics in Medieval times. Interesting. Seeing as how quantum theory wouldn’t exist for several hundred years, they didn’t. He’s saying the comment is similar to philosophical arguments that were made about God in the Middle Ages. He didn’t say anything about expertiments. ---
**Author:** ![TravisT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ea5d25/32.png) [@TravisT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TravisT)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/270 "2012-04-24T21:46:08Z")
I like to look at the very large and the very small and see the patterns that emerge. As a fiction writer I’m allowed to take large leaps and I imagine the question, from reading the article, that what if we are all equivalent to atomic particles existing (and informing), inside of a much larger scaled brain that is God? Please forgive me. I’ve seen an artisitic rendering of the universe from a distance and it resembles a brain cell, fairly closely. In the multiverse view, each universe is an individual cell, and black holes are synapses between them, sharing information. Information is sucked out of our universe through black holes and could in theory feed into another universe so, why not? If we are all connected, so are we connected to the universe and then the multiverse and to the brane (brain in my imagined proposal). So to go off point but I had to vent. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/271 "2012-04-24T21:50:14Z")
> [@TravisT](#): > > As a fiction writer I’m allowed to take large leaps and I imagine the question, from reading the article, that what if we are all equivalent to atomic particles existing (and informing), inside of a much larger scaled brain that is God? I think this is the point in the conservation where somebody is supposed to take out the bong. ---
**Author:** ![TravisT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ea5d25/32.png) [@TravisT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TravisT)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/272 "2012-04-24T21:50:30Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Seeing as how quantum theory wouldn’t exist for several hundred years, they didn’t. He’s saying the comment is similar to philosophical arguments that were made about God in the Middle Ages. He didn’t say anything about expertiments. I suppose I misunderstood his meaning. As if to suggest there was no difference in the medievel superstitious view of God and this new scienctific theory. I thought he was dismissing the data. Sorry. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/273 "2012-04-24T21:53:22Z")
> [@TravisT](#): > > I suppose I misunderstood his meaning. As if to suggest there was no difference in the medievel superstitious view of God and this new scienctific theory. I thought he was dismissing the data. I think that _is_ what he’s saying, and a supposition is not the same thing as data. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/274 "2012-04-24T21:54:58Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I think this is the point in the conservation where somebody is supposed to take out the bong. At that point in the conversation it is usually time to put the bong _away_. ---
**Author:** ![TravisT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ea5d25/32.png) [@TravisT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TravisT)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/275 "2012-04-24T21:56:04Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I think this is the point in the conservation where somebody is supposed to take out the bong. Puff, puff give, please. LOL! My point, I suppose, is that just because we can dismiss the classical view of God and even disprove it with simple logic, that it doesn’t mean there aren’t more complex and implicit notions of what God could be. I don’t think anyone will ever know the true nature of God, if God exists. But I enjoy imagining It. ---
**Author:** ![TravisT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ea5d25/32.png) [@TravisT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TravisT)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/276 "2012-04-24T21:58:19Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I think that _is_ what he’s saying, and a supposition is not the same thing as data. I was under the impression that Dr. Goswani was using the scientific method of gathering data? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/277 "2012-04-24T21:59:41Z")
> [@TravisT](#): > > My point, I suppose, is that just because we can dismiss the classical view of God and even disprove it with simple logic, that it doesn’t mean there aren’t more complex and implicit notions of what God could be. I agree- although I dismiss the complex ones along with the simple ones. At a certain point it stops being anything that is recognizably a god and just becomes a personification or a metaphor or something. > [@TravisT](#): > > I was under the impression that Dr. Goswani was using the scientific method of gathering data? The article and the interview don’t include any data. It’s all interpretation and philosophy. ---
**Author:** ![TravisT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ea5d25/32.png) [@TravisT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TravisT)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/278 "2012-04-24T22:04:12Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I agree- although I dismiss the complex ones along with the simple ones. At a certain point it stops being anything that is recognizably a god and just becomes a personification or a metaphor or something. Perhaps, but as we evolve shouldn’t our understanding evolve as well? When was god ever really recognizable? I think theologians throughout time have been clear that no one will ever know the true nature of God. Yes, they have decided what God must be like, a long white beard (looking strikingly like Zeus) and rendering judgement and retribution from above, as if God is a seperate being. But what if that’s not the case? What if we are all God? To me that expands God into something more complex. It pushes the envelope a bit further is all. ---
**Author:** ![TravisT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ea5d25/32.png) [@TravisT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TravisT)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/279 "2012-04-24T22:05:57Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I agree- although I dismiss the complex ones along with the simple ones. At a certain point it stops being anything that is recognizably a god and just becomes a personification or a metaphor or something. > The article and the interview don’t include any data. It’s all interpretation and philosophy. I need to read it again, but I thought they mentioned experiments in the intro. ---
**Author:** ![TravisT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ea5d25/32.png) [@TravisT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TravisT)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737/280 "2012-04-24T22:09:58Z")
“And as they say in the world of science, Goswami has done his math. Marshalling evidence from recent research in cognitive psychology, biology, parapsychology and quantum physics…” That suggest to me he’s gathering data. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/present-evidence-for-the-existence-of-your-deity/619737.md?page=15)