Evidence for God from Science

Does either side really win with their arguments though? I mean what do they achieve? I do think they both present a good snapshot of what both sides usually offer.

A very, very good question.

The following is a transcript of an interview conducted this morning on BBC Radio 4. I would be very interested in a sztraw poll amongst members on this site as to who you think "wins" the debate: Interviewer : The author Christopher Hitchens has a new book out. It's called God Is Not Grea...

"Moral Atheist" - given that morals are only, and can (reasonably) only, be god-given (whence could they come otherwise:?), this is a contradition in terms, isn't it?

Sylla, That's very sweet, but please be assured you didn't hurt my feelings! I like a good argument and positively revel in copping the odd bit of unneccessary flak (and I didn't feel I copped any from you Sylla - gloves or no gloves!) - I was kind of hoping for a bit more flak, matter of fact. I ca...

Just FYI the rest of this thread - which I personally think is still interesting - has been unilaterally moved to the Garbage bin. I'm trying to wean myself off this site. I would gladly carry on this and any of the other threads I've been involved in via email. My address is electric.ray@btopenworl...

Jeff I had a great holiday thanks. On to your first point, this is not a circular argument but a mathematical one, which you seem to like. Like all arguments with no inductive component, purely mathematical arguments are circular. Mathematics is not science. by itself, it is not capable of telling u...

Um, sorry, one more thing. Kureiuo, you have challenged, so I must answer. However, if you wish to keep with your first statement that science is unable to prove "anything," then please tell me which premises you disagree with and why in my syllogistic argument above. You'll be glad to kno...

Jac I didn't want to continue to post, but I do feel the need to say I'm aware of the debate surrounding falsifiability - it is true that Popper's theory for the development of scientific knowledge isn't generally accepted nowadays (I don't agree with it in whole either): better accounts have been g...

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder Bav! Don't paraphrase parts of my sentences please (don't mean that in a nasty way) I didn't paraphrase - it was a straight lift, and it didn't alter the context. You are mistaken in what you are saying here. Scientific theories have to be *falsifiable* to be sci...

let's call it quits. This isn't getting anyone anywhere. I get the sense you're all getting sick of it, and to be honest I am too. You'll all probably be be relived to hear I think I'm pretty much done with this board. Here's a parting thought for you - and it's not a religious one, but a psychologi...

if Science can't prove anything then Science at the same token couldn't falsify or disprove. Actually, this is flat out wrong. Take the theory that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. I get in my car and drive up the M40 and I can't get anywhere near the spead of light. This is consi...

Guys - I've done you a disservice in that I've tried (poorly) to summarise your arguments and reject them in one fell swoop, and they clearly need more attention than that. I'm busy at the moment, but will try to reply in a more considered fashion to the points you've raised at the weekend. Kureiuo ...

True Believer Your arguments are poor and, in a number of respects, frankly offensive, and they don't really deserve the dignity of a fuller response, other than to your coda: The more you sin, the sooner you die and science has proved that. Utter nonsense. Anyone with a modicum of understanding of ...

building confidence is the point of the "trick" and so is better regarded more of a tool than a trick. That depends from whose perspective you look. Engendering confidence is a tool of the trickster. Having (misplaced) confidence is the folly of the tricked. The argument Kurieuo (Kurieuo,...

K wrote:people will find the cross foolish, but God still chose the foolishness of the cross as a way to save those who believe

That's the nub of it. To you, that's a reason to believe. To me, that's the oldest confidence trick in the book.