Evidence for God from Science

Hi thanks for trying to clear the definitions up. As I have posted on another thread, I am probably better of exploring this question by reading the arguments somewhere, instead of discussing them, since I probably wont be able to think up original points at my level of understanding it. You have ho...

I partially agree with some of the principles you describe. I think what you have written is fine, and I believe I understand the intention in what youre saying. but I do - as you might have expected - have some differing opinions. Science as a field describing the universe and all in it, as far as ...

cslewislover: Rearding ID in schools, you basically give the answer yourself. A philosophy of science is a good thing, and it can be argued that ID is such a thing. Simply put, the problem is if a philsophy assumes god exists, then it is not a philosophy regarding life on earth, but gods existance. ...

thx for responding. in regard to paradoxes in science, the most obvoius one is of course the duality of photons, having both particle and wave properties. Basically light is inherently self contradictive, but that has in fact been quite helpful since this property has contributed to the discovery of...

well the hole idea of a big crunch is contrary to the results of the WMAP sattelite. http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/news/ The probable scenario is now an open universe, expanding at increasing rate.

hi I am open to the idea of some sort of deity, but I am a science teacher, and is therefore very interested in the possibility of scientific/logical proof or disproval of gods existance. This is why I was quite excited to find your page with counterarguments to scientifc claims of proofs against go...

btw - I see rich has started most threads in here, and they are linked to his articles. Have I started my thread in the wrong forum, or is this the right one?

thanks for the link - it was very helpful. It brought a lot of light to the question, and I think it brought it to a new level - but didn't solve the basic problem. If he must use his omnipotence to restrain his power, then he is forced to do it, and thus is not omnipotent. I stil lack an argument s...

Besides, the question of selfcondradiction does NOT collapse on itself from a scientific point of view. You dismiss the rock argument, arguing that gods powers are infinite, thus an infinitely large rock would be required in order for him to move it. However infinite powers are not possible, since t...

I think you are underestimating the question. I for one know that I can surprise myself from time to time. So it is not just a matter of contradiction. Having a free will give you the option to be impulsive, and hence surprising yourself. God has a free will, but being omnipresent and omniscient, he...

Hi cslewislover(i like those books as well!) Although you find the rock thing silly, the principle of the question is higly relevant, since it excludes the concept of omnipotens. However I do thank you for trying to respond seriously. what his chooses to do is not relevant to the question, however, ...

Hi. I am new to this forum, but have recently begun debating religion and science on the web. As a science teacher I read a lot of articles on different fields of research, but my passion is with high energy physics and the likes. I surfed to this website yesterday, and read your arguments concernin...

I came accross this website http://www.expelledexposed.com/index.php/the-truth which kind of discredits the movie scientifically and intellectually as well as it accuses the movie of twisting truth as well as telling only facts which strengthen their point. It is claimed to be biased propaganda. I h...