Proof god doesn't exist

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by nc-1701, Oct 11, 2006.

  1. fergus

    fergus Chieftain

    Jun 6, 2006
    The end of ours will beginning of another civilazation like ours that find themselves alone but find many fascinating things wondering who created them then they will think of god and his power to make such thing.
  2. beingofone

    beingofone Warlord

    Jan 29, 2003
    Have you journeyed to the springs of the sea or walked in the recesses of the deep? Have the gates of death been shown to you? Have you seen the gates of the shadow of death? Have you comprehended the vast expanses of the earth? Tell me, if you know all this. What is the way to the abode of light? And where does darkness reside?"
    -- Job 38:16-19


    No it is not the best model we have, it is just a theory to exclude what some do not like.

    We do not know how the brain works or what it does, we only know it processes thought - thats it.

    It could be a receptor of consciousness, that is just as plausible. Like radio waves and a TV or radio. Many scientists like David Bohm hold to that idea.

    How can the eye see itself?

    I could, I have done it many times. What is a waste of time is if someone just nitpicks and fails to even attempt to understand the logic.

    If you tell me, you will do your level best to understand, than yes, I would take you through the steps.

    It requires absolute honesty - if you are willing to acknowledge what is self evident then no problem. I have discussed this before when some just want to obfuscate, that is to waste both of oue valuable time, yes?

    It is so simple it is hard to understand, because it is so simple.

    It is like trying to think of what your consciousness is, is it the full set of reality or a subset of the universe?

    My bad.

    Abiogenesis has no cooralate in modern physics. Consciousness is a singularity by and through observation, logic, and experience, therefore; will/intent with design/purpose.

    You missed the point - who or what is observing or thinking "the Earth orbits the sun when we've never put a planet into orbit"?

    How many conscious experiences of perception can you have?

    And because Joseph Stalin was an atheist, does that mean all atheists are murderers?

    You do not know me well enough to say this.

    There is no current scientific theory that is cohesive on what consciousness is. It is why the subject is avoided at all cost.

    How amusing; the very consciousness used to determine its source is itself excluded.

    That is because he is almost never defined, and so, we cannot find what we are not looking for can we?

    It is akin to looking for a single atom in a galaxy, if we have no definition of what God is, you might be talking to him or have already met him and were singularly unimpressed. After all, why does God need to impress you?

    I do and did - you have lived a life without seeing what defies the ordinary reality? Experience of the ineffible once and you have a paradigm about the nature of our universe for the rest of your life.

    It does take opening your mind and letting a little light in however.

    So if God is truly himself - why would he show up as a wood elf or tooth fairy?

    He is not subject to his creation and he does not answer to you.

    In order to understand; you must look at reality through an entirely different paradigm.

    Ie: Stop thinking; I am a human, trying to imagine God - Think instead, if I were God, what would I imagine it is like to be human?

    Don`t toss this out without pondering please.

    The whole problem with a material view is that you are using your counsciousness to think about your consciousness. That is the whole problem with science, they want to exclude their very own conscious experience and try to study it objectively - that is impossible.

    Can you experience something outside of your counsciousness?

    Can you remember your first moment of awareness?

    Can you remember a time when you were not?

    What are you aware of that is ouside of your perception?

    Where does reality begin?

    What is your consciousness, is it energy?

    Follow that dusty trail of logic all the way to the end - will/design.

    Pattern indicates intellect. That means the universe is constructed by design by logic, it is not chaotic as math is consistant.

    Because you see through the self imposed limitations of physical barriers.

    Ruthless self honesty and abject humility. Most are not ethical enough to take logic to its ultimate conclusion, including the contradictions of organized religion.

    I never deceive myself and am aware I am not anything more than a vessel or conduit.

    You have solved all philisophical questions concerning the nature of reality then?

    If we are both aware of truth, it is self evident, as it stands the acid test of experience, yes?


    Cmon warpus, I mean duh - it is proof that the subjective cannot be tested by experiment.

    Are you often mislead by your perception? I would say; try being honest with yourself.

    But we don`t create theories of black holes and galaxies becoming consciousness though, now do we?

    What is reality?

    God is not a person, being, or entity. I am a Christian, just not your run in the mill Bible thumper.

    What is God?

    By the way - what is space?

    Even if you ignore me, I am going to respond to some of the things you said. How do you like them apples?

    Just because proof is ignored does not mean it is nonexistent.

    That just means you don`t like the answers.

    And science conjures up fanciful tales of abiogenesis without a shred of proof.

    I think those that deny God are just that - in denial.

    I would say, you have lived a very sheltered life.

    How deep have you searched? How long have you looked?

    The proof is right between your eyes.

    Are you an antiEaster Bunny and an antiSanta Clause kinda guy?

    I do not believe in the Easter Bunny, but I don`t spend my time posting about it.

    I think atheists are mad at God - they should forgive him.

    Go ahead Curt - gimme your toughest question.

    Me 2 - like believing a piece of slime sprang legs and became life - what nonsense - takes more faith to believe that than Santa.

    Like governmaent had nothing to do with it [insert roll eyes].

    Yeah - love thy neighbor as thyself is one of the biggest evils of human history.

    Have you solved every question of existence then?

    What is reality?

    Do you care about yourself? - hint - big clue as to why God cares.

    "Except a man take up his cross"
    -- Jesus

    That would be akin to taking up your electric chair. Of course, everyone is smarter than Jesus these days.

    You do it over and over and over again.

    I can answer your questions because I have spent my entire life searching for truth. God showed up one day.

    And this is why it is pointless so you are probably right.

    There may be a God beyond all concepts and can be experienced but you would have to open your mind to the possibility Curt.

    I agree completely - that does not mean God is not real and cannot be experienced.

    God is not a being, he is not even a supremely great being - he is being in and of itself. That is why you cannot find God through exoteric means alone.

    Once God appears in the esoteric he manifests in the exoteric.

    How about I threaten you with the place called Heck - its kinda like a big sauna thats overcrowded. A little cooler than a lake of fire.

    And you have made it clear that any believer is delusional - I beg to differ. Maybe my tactics are crude and I mean you no offence but your posts were insulting.

    Only if you ignore the red letters.

    I think you are using the land you stand on as a crutch - you should jump in the ocean and be free from the constraints of land.


    You are having a conversation with him right now, hard to believe huh?

    That is why you must open your mind and let some light in there.

    As far as I know - they were not born, died, then resurrected with real people - names, address, and you could talk to them.

    God does not exists - full stop.

    The only way to find God is to know that he cannot possibly exist.

    Except in 1945 they found 40 brand new Christian books that had not been seen since the time of Jesus. Guess what Curt? They all, everyone, say Jesus resurrected.

    Its called the Nag Hammadi find - of course you have to be a true sceptic to examine all the evidence because a false sceptic ignores the evidence - know what I mean?

    So were literally thousands of people deluded?

    For the most part - I agree.

    Actually - everywhere.

    "You are all Buddhas, just open your eyes"
    -- Gautama

    And after almost 40 years of study - the scripture keeps up its momentum of expansion. It is like new colors of the rainbow, that is called infinite thought.

    You begin to see God everywhere, including as you Curt.

    Not true at all. These men were not primitive and you know I have studied the ancient world.

    Yes I can understand them completey because I have devoted my life to it.

    They produced men like Socrates, Plato, Caeser, and Jesus. In many ways they were way more advanced in thought than modern society. Did you know they found a Greek analogue computer dated before Jesus? They were performing modern surgery and is what we base modern concepts of government on.

    I see God everywhere, it is so obvious.

    Your consciousness is the proof - but you would have to understand by way of an internal journey to delve into the infinite.

    No - all it requires is brutal honesty and humility you will find God.

    You think he is the only one? Check into something called rainbow light by Tibetan Buddhists. Jesus was the longest dead that resurrected and had the most eyewitnesses.

    He was a master that understood the life/death paradigm. Of course everyone is smarter than Jesus these days.


    El_Machinae, I enjoy your questions and comments, they are honest and sincere.

    Sin - to not know who you are and be lost in multiple identites seeking the 'right' identity that will bring satisfaction, reckognition, and admiration.

    Salvation - is to know who and what you are with crystal clarity.

    When you see Jesus, you are seeing a mirror image of your tue self.

    I do not care about you like myself because you deserve it. It makes me okay with me, I am healthy and fullfilled when I follow the golden rule. The key that unlocks the door is forgiveness.
  3. Dong2Long

    Dong2Long Chieftain

    Oct 20, 2006
    Continental mannen
    Classical_hero (Genius at Work) and Starlifter (Lifting Stars) 1 2 3 4 have some very intellectually objective points in this thread. If understood by readers, what they are showing is nothing less than scientific unity with a Creator, and even note that this does not make the leap to a specific religion per se, nor does it need to. Science, logic, and theory are what they are; when they take their course, using Baconian methodology (cut away that which is not relevant, leaving what is essential to scientific thought), one is left with:

    1. The universe is not eternal, in origin.
    2. The universe came into being at a discrete point in the past.
    3. Science can now adequately model the universe to the point just after the event of Creation.
    4. Science cannot model or describe the creation event.
    5. Within this post-created universe, science and observed rules of the universe do not, nor ever will, allow description of either the event of creation, or what went before.

    The above is basic, though profound, in implication. Its final analysis supports a creation event, and a creation mechanism. It is academically valid to call this mechanism a creator, or even The Creator. Science, barring further revelation as to the nature of the Creator (inference, from the Creator Himself), is unlikely to demonstrate a proof of a particular religious view. But that would be beyond the topic of this thead... the interpretation of circumstantial evidence, which could support or deny a particular religions faith.

    Hard to find objective thought directed to the accomplishment of this thread's ambitions topic: Proof god doesn't exist. There is a swamp of hundreds of posts, especially certain diatribes that are not even remotely on topic. Evidently, thread topic is difficult for some people to really contribute to, when they are aware of the implications of being unable to scientifically prove the non-existance of a creation mechanism, which is awfully close to one interpetation of what God could be described as... namely, the creator of Earth, the Universe, and all that is.
  4. El_Machinae

    El_Machinae Colour vision since 2018 Retired Moderator

    Nov 24, 2005
    Pale Blue Dot youtube=wupToqz1e2g
    It's certainly not avoided, but very much avoided by amateurs. There are hundreds of hours being devoted by specialist doctors working on these theories. But we all recognise that it's hard, too hard to summarise into something that can be taught to one person.

    You must be referring to our light bubble.

    Your 3. also contradicts your 1. If you 'know' 3., then you don't 'know' 1. - you merely suspect it.
  5. Dong2Long

    Dong2Long Chieftain

    Oct 20, 2006
    Continental mannen
    If you know (or in science, can show) a creation event, then you have shown that the universe is not eternal.

    On the surface, you can take a different tack: If science acknowledges that it cannot describe (or observ) the event of Creation, nor what preceeded creation, then one cannot necessarily show with science that the #1 actually occurred... something else can be at work which is simply not understood, but yet always was (which means eternal, and the "out" for a way to abvoid scientific acknowledgement of a Creator). This is the area that very serious, and so far ultimately unsucessful, work is being done by phycists who want the option for non-creation. Infinite universes/dimensions, alternate universe rules, unfolding from n-nimenional hyperspace, etc. The work is not done, of course; but right now, with existing science, one is pretty isolated if one has a view that things have always been, for infinity far back. So there is some help, or at least background, for those who (on any "side")... for non-academically honest reasons... prefer to have an outcome, and look to ('prefer') certain science that supports that preferred agenda. :cool:
  6. Sidhe

    Sidhe Deity

    Jan 30, 2006
    If your using creation in terms of a divine instigator it's not science, therefore scientists have nothing to say about it at all, for or against, nor can they nor can you or anyone else from anything but a philosophical perspective, since there is no proof or disproof it is simply a non starter. The same goes for multiverses unfolding from n-dimensional hyperspace, complete speculation.

    The only agenda science has is trying to avoid philosophical discussion in what essentially is a methodical pursuit of proofs, and not getting involved in arm waving speculation about a creator, which is irrelevant and besides the point.Basically If the universe was or wasn't created by God, they can't prove it nor will they ever be able to without some divine intervention, so it really doesn't matter either way and just clouds the issues with intangibles.
  7. Perfection

    Perfection The Great Head.

    Apr 9, 2002
    Salisbury Plain
    If it is not the best model, then surely you can explain to me a better model and how it better explains the data.

    Actually we know a massive amount more! We know where certain features of our conciousness are in our brains. We understand how chemicals can alter our conciousness. We understand a massive amount about how much the brain works. It's by no means complete, but it's enough for numerous practical applications and making basic claims about it featurses

    1. David Bohm was not a dualist. He held a bizzare crackpot view of the brain that has almost no acceptance in the scientific community (especially among those who actually work with the brain) but he was not a duaist.
    2. It is not as plausible. How can you explain Alzhiemer's with this? Alzhiemer's isn't like the mind is phasing in and out but more like it's actually being destroyed one function at a time.

    A mirror! (Or in the case of the brain, an EEG, x-rays, PET scans, MRI scans, nuerosurgery, brain injury analysis and numerous other mechanisms)

    I will respond to the rest shortly.
  8. Perfection

    Perfection The Great Head.

    Apr 9, 2002
    Salisbury Plain
    I always attempt my best to maintain intellectual honesty.

    I'll make no garuntees that I'll agree with you with that is self-evident. I will garuntee that I will attempt to do my best to be intellectually honest.

    When it comes to great philosophical questions it seems to me that oversimplification is a common problem, but please to attempt to explain this simple arguement.

    It certainly is a subset of the universe. I'm not Timmy.

    Still seems like word soup to me. What do you mean by "cooralate"? What is "a singularity by and through observation, logic, and experience"? "therefore; will/intent with design/purpose.", huh?

    Well what is the point?

    Of course not, but it does show that eyewitnesses can be deluded into thinking faith healing works by other people, so a better standard of proof needs to be implemented to say that faith healing works. We cannot admit eyewitness testimony as the sole evidence for the efficacy of faith healing because eyewitnesses can be easily fooled.

    How have you been skeptical of faith healers?

    "Conciousness" is a vague poorly-definined term, scientists tend not to use it because it doesn't convey the precision needed.

    What do you define as God? I have a vague definition involving some big intelligent thing that has powers well beyond that of superman.

    We stumble across all sorts of unexpected knowledge all the time.

    I see stuff that defies ordinary reality on occasion, it's just easier for me to state that my senses gave me false data and move on rather then say that there's some massive portion of the universe that this provides a tiny window too.

    I'm not grasping that responds to my previous statement (Sure [experiences of an image of a mountain in my mind] are, but that doesn't mean that the mountain is the same sort of "real" as Mt. Everest.)

    I know, God Hates me :(

    Anyways, I'm gonna go do some laundry and take a shower, I'll bang out some more lies later.
  9. FredLC

    FredLC A Lawyer as You Can See! Retired Moderator

    Jan 29, 2002
    Vitória, ES, Brazil
    Actually, the reason is quite simple and most likely ennerving to creationists.

    The reason is evolution. Or rather, evolutionary processes - namely, "competition" and "survival of the fittest".

    See, abiogenesis is a rather inneficient event. It takes a huge time spam, takes the gathering of very specific conditions that have to last a certain while, without change, and than alter themselves in the proper moment... and it also counts with an overabundance of avaiable resources for unnequiped early entities.

    Those conditions could be met in the primordial earth... but not today. The planet is infested with much more efficient beings that compete fiercely for resources. So, entities much better equipped to seek, and achieve, and use, environmental resources than basic self-duplicating RNAs are already on the loosing end - let alone these almost mineral entities. And without these resources, primordial beings have no chance in hell of sustaining their chains enough to evolve into complex beings.

    So, abyogenesis has taken care of even the chances of that happening again, save perhaps in isolated ecological isles, and even in these, unlikely, for being small samples.

    Rather less arbitrary a reason than saying that "creation does not happen today because God don't want to", huh?

    Regards :).
  10. Perfection

    Perfection The Great Head.

    Apr 9, 2002
    Salisbury Plain
    Done! Now what?

    Certainly, there's some philosophical assumptions and blocks to complete objectivity in science, but the empirical methodology is by-and-large sound and has proven itself over and over again to be viable. I can't say the same about faith.

    What does that have to do with materialism?

    Pattern does not indicate intellect. Clouds make all them pretty patterned snowflakes, but clouds have no intellect.

    They're not self-imposed, they're physics-imposed. I recongize the fact that I can't fly, do you?

    How can you have self-honesty and abject humility when you claim that you never deceive yourself? Everybody deceives themselves.

    Of course not, but I'd say that my model of reality fits better then those that include a God, and that's about as close to truth that I say anything can get.

    Not neccearily, Carl may disagree.
  11. Cheezy the Wiz

    Cheezy the Wiz Socialist In A Hurry

    Jul 18, 2005
    That's the longest post I ever seen.

    I do, however, have a question:

    What is abiogenesis?
  12. Birdjaguar

    Birdjaguar Hanafubuki Super Moderator Supporter

    Dec 24, 2001
    Albuquerque, NM
    Beingofone, your long post was interesting and in many ways we are in agreement, but I fear that on the subject of "first life" you will face a serious challenge. I am confident that science will connect the dots between non life to life. ATM, IMHO, virus research is leading the way. Once that is shown, many of the obvious failings of christianity will fall away perhaps leaving the better parts to prosper.

    Once life is tied directly to the rest of the universe as part of the fabric of creation, god, as a being of one, can stand alone.

    God alone is.
  13. El_Machinae

    El_Machinae Colour vision since 2018 Retired Moderator

    Nov 24, 2005
    Pale Blue Dot youtube=wupToqz1e2g
    Abiogenesis is the development of life from non-life. The wiki is remarkably short on details of the various current theories, though

    I see variants of what Perfection is debating all the time. In my opinion, it takes intellect to notice a pattern. It takes intellect and intuition to notice patterns between things. It also takes intellect to exclude evidence from a pattern.

    But there are brain-sets (people at certain levels of biochemistry) where the observer will claim that there's a pattern that a 'regular' person will not admit. They will connect events as tied together, where a regular person will believe them to be separate events.

    We see 'patterns' in the universe, but only because we're looking for them. It takes intellect to notice how things are 'similar' while excluding evidences that they are not. Nothing is 'the same' as something else, but they can be 'close enough' to be grouped together; different people have different standards that they are applying to these groupings.
  14. Perfection

    Perfection The Great Head.

    Apr 9, 2002
    Salisbury Plain
    The idea that life came from a complex series of organic reactions in early Earth.
  15. mdwh

    mdwh Deity

    May 14, 2005
    A theory is, by definition, a model, and one supported by evidence. There is no "just" when it comes to a scientific theory.
  16. warpus

    warpus In pork I trust

    Aug 28, 2005
    Stamford Bridge
    Forgiven :)

    Christianity teaches good concepts & valuable lessons, such as loving your neighbour, for example. The truth I've found in Christianity isn't historical and it doesn't teach me anything about the nature of the Universe, but it is rather simple lessons revolving around living a good life.

    Look in a mirror ;)

    You jumped to that conclusion without any justification.

    I counter your point with the example of the snowflake.

    Yes, we are often mislead by our senses. Our brains are incredibly complex pattern recognition machines - we see things that aren't there.. especially if we really want to see them.

    Now you're just moving the goalposts.

    Your point was that anything that can't be studied in a lab cannot be possibly understood, something I disagreed with and countered with examples.

    You see what you want to see.
  17. Cheezy the Wiz

    Cheezy the Wiz Socialist In A Hurry

    Jul 18, 2005
    Oh, I didn't know that was the name for it.

    So, why can't that jump from non-life to life be of divine origin? Surely there's something odd and unexplainable about that shift from non-life to life. I also get the feeling that I'm summing up pages of argument in this thread into a paragraph. ( I haven't read the parts about abiogenisis, save for a skim enough to have seen the word).
  18. warpus

    warpus In pork I trust

    Aug 28, 2005
    Stamford Bridge
    It could be of divine origin, but so could be many other things.. There is just no proof that it is of divine origin, so making that assumption isn't a very sensible thing to do, imo.

    If we can explain the shift from non-life to life then it won't be that unexplainable. I'm no abiogenesis expert, but that is what the discipline is attempting to explain - the shift from non-life to life. You're just assuming that the process is unexplainable.
  19. Cheezy the Wiz

    Cheezy the Wiz Socialist In A Hurry

    Jul 18, 2005
    Well that's why I asked, I didn't know if there was an explanation for why such a change occurred. And you're right, just because we can't explain something doesn't mean its unexplainable and ought to be choked up to an Act of God.
  20. beingofone

    beingofone Warlord

    Jan 29, 2003

    I know; I meant with regard to philosophy and religion.


    Ask yourself what the experience of consciousness itself tells you. That will be more accurate then theories.

    If you were to ask yourself - "when did I begin"?
    You would answer - "I can`t remember."

    If God asks himself the same question - he gets the same answer.

    Yup; and it can all mean it is a resistor, receptor, and a capacitor for energy.

    All you said still means the brain processes thought. It does not mean it is the source, there is no consensus on the fountain of life.

    Nonsense; he was responsible for astounding breakthroughs in brain neuropsychology and nuerosurgery because of his holographic view.

    -- Wiki

    How can you explain a television with a fuzzy picture? Does that mean the radio waves have collapsed?

    You are seeing thought being processed, that is the brains function. You can test the voltage on a radio, that is not the waves.

    Okay cool - First question.

    Is your experience always in a state of flux?

    Actually; truth is seeing the obvious without the filter of misperception of invested interest. Occams razor is ever so sharp as to reduce truth to what it only can be, the lowest denominator.

    Second question:
    If your experience is in a state of never ending change, how much energy is involved in its momentum?

    Third question:
    How many perceptions do you have?

    Where in physics does energy spring from stasis?

    Fourth question:
    Can you experience another consciousness other than your own?

    Fifth question:
    Is your experience reality?

    Sixth question:
    How many realities do you experience?

    Seventh question:
    Can you experience another reality?

    Can you be fooled?

    Eighth question:
    Do you trust your experience?

    There are many fakes.

    An imitation is just that - it almost always copies the real deal.

    How about 'life-force', does that work for a definition?

    God = Ultimate Reality.

    Not a person, being, or creature but reality in and of itself.

    But yet ---- so sure there is no God?

    That is why I keep saying, open the mind and heart.

    The only way to apprehend truth is to be completely alone with your convictions. You must ignore society, wife, husband, peers, billboard signs, Hollywood, political correctness, and external approval. Trust yourself and your own experience with recklessness. There is no higher authority than you.

    The true test is - how long you can be alone and completely misunderstood and still trust yourself with absolute abandon?

    Ninth question:
    Is your thought, emotions, and life-force a real experience?

    LOL - He may be closer than you think.

    Once you stop projecting God out past the Milky Way or imagine him being a dude sitting on a throne somewhere - where else might you look?

    Tenth question:
    Is your experience ever stopped?

    Eleventh question:
    How many objects are you aware of at this moment?

    Twelfth question:
    Where does your perception end and reality begin?


    Reverse the equation and tell me what all matter is.

    Thirteenth question:
    Tell me how you can have a pattern without intellect?

    That is why I can pray for you Perfection and send you good will and know that they will come your way. The result is you will be blessed, that is what it means to be a believer and actually see the results by transcending time and space.

    You cannot have any limit without it being transcended, logically impossibility. The very act of setting a limit means it has already been transcended by the limit itself, follow?

    A drop of water will transcend being a drop by heat, cool, or more water.

    Not everyone, most everyone.

    It is what is described as "awakened".

    I do not filter my experience with preconceived ideas - we live in a universe with infinite momentum and as such all possibilities are viable in an infinite state of flux. Anything that can happen, will happen, and does so for those with eyes to see and ears to hear.

    How much do you know out of all there is to know?10%, 5%, 1%?

    Out of all there is to know outside of what you do, what is there room for?

    How much have you experienced out of all there is to? Have you excluded the 90% that you have yet to see?

    Then; what is Truth?


    I will not hold my breath.

    Even if they did connect the dots (which is hyperbole), it would still not answer the question of existence. It would just mean; we now are really not sure at all what it is we experience.

    The scripture states categorically that we are tied to the rest of the universe.

    I agree - God alone is. He is the fabric of what you are, that is crystal clear in the teachings of Jesus, Paul, and Jewish scripture, without the sunglasses of dogma.


    Yes; science, at its very best, is a good guess.


    It is a non sequitur, how many perceptions do you have?

    Can you measure a snowflake?

    That is called delusion or wishfull thinking. It can be cured, Jesus said so.

    I am saying - the subjective cannot be submitted to scientific methodology and yet.. it is a real experience.

    When you look for God, where do you find him?

Share This Page