Evidence for God from Science

Kenny wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

edwardmurphy wrote:I'm not an atheist because I find atheism attractive. I'm an atheist because I don't believe the people who claim that gods exist, and I haven't seen any other evidence. Atheism actually comes with a lot of downsides. Religion offers answers and responses to loss, death, tragedy, inequality, and injustice. Atheism takes all of that away and offers nothing in return. That doesn't matter because I'm not sitting here doing a cost-benefit analysis. From my point of view atheism is the only option because gods don't exist and religion is founded on an empty throne.

You know, I like your honesty Ed here.
Many Atheists still try to argue for meaning and the like to such.
I think it is crucially important to understand the truth in what you wrote, within the debate.

Sadly, I think it impossible for anyone to truly embrace the world that Atheism would logically leaves us with.
That is no meaning and nothing in return except to just perhaps shake our fists at the absurdity of life while we just continue. And yet, we cry unfair if treated unfair. We feel anger at injustice. We do feel a person's life matters, even our own. Not just now, but in some lasting way. Religion or no religion, this is just what we feeling and intuitively believe.

One of the biggest arguments, I see for God, isn't one that proves with absolutely certainty God's existence.
BUT, rather an argument from coherency. Given all I see as real and intuitively accept to be true, which beliefs seems more coherent: God or no God.

What are all those beliefs I just accept and believe to be true. As I live life, I just naturally affirm much stuff you mentioned over and over again without even thinking. Others do too, I'm damn sure you do too particularly with injustices as they surround Christian bigots and churches. All those things you mentioned in the negative, I feel strongly there is meaning in loss and death, true meaning in life and things that happen to us, meaning in tragedy, that people really do matter and can make a lasting impact, also feeling empathy for those who have been wrongly hurt, treated unjustly and the like.

Now what makes all that coherent, and as such me true to myself? I believe you said it: Religion, by which you really mean God which is more the answer I'd accept. That is, I don't see religion as anything more than man's attempt at reaching up; I don't need any person or man-made religion telling me God exists and here He is, do this and that, say your prayers like this, believe this and that, ask no questions just do, do, do. Such repulses me. It even repulsed Christ if you read the Gospels. BUT, to reject God's existence, I may as well be rejecting myself since such would make me inconsistent with all these concepts I find meaningful -- concepts of fairness, equality, justice, love, morality and the like.

I agree with Ed when he said:
Religion offers answers and responses to loss, death, tragedy, inequality, and injustice. Atheism takes all of that away and offers nothing in return.
But it needs to be pointed out, that atheists do not depend upon atheism for these things; atheism is not a substitute for religion. IOW we have ways of dealing with these things, they just don’t involve God.

Ken

edwardmurphy wrote:I'm not an atheist because I find atheism attractive. I'm an atheist because I don't believe the people who claim that gods exist, and I haven't seen any other evidence. Atheism actually comes with a lot of downsides. Religion offers answers and responses to loss, death, tragedy, inequality, and injustice. Atheism takes all of that away and offers nothing in return. That doesn't matter because I'm not sitting here doing a cost-benefit analysis. From my point of view atheism is the only option because gods don't exist and religion is founded on an empty throne.

Audie wrote:

Kenny wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:Nothing about atheism attracts me. I think atheists are some of the most intellectually dishonest people there are.I mean they say we who believe in God have not provided enough evidence to convince them our God is real,yet they accept atheism with absolutely no evidence at all it is true and they even brag about them not needing evidence. It is a double standard that they overlook,they set the bar for evidence so high when it comes to God yet give atheism a pass when it comes to evidence. Even false religions have more evidence than atheism does.

Also from what I hear from atheist scientists who alot of atheists look up to? It requires alot more faith to believe the atheist scientist than to believe everything in the bible. Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." is so much easier to believe than anything I've heard them come up with.Atheists willingly take the long way around to try to discover the truth,while acting like they don't.

As a caring Atheist, I am going to inform you that there is an argument against atheism that is irrefutable.
Atheism is the rejection of the man made claim that God exist.

You can reduce Atheism to dust, reduce it to absurdity by just supplying evidence that supports the claim that man makes about the existence of God.

Ken

Heck, why not wipe out evolution, too? All that is needed is one good solid contrary fact.

No disproof has ever been offered yet. Not one sad weary little fact.

Excuses, hoaxes, lies, strawmen, misrepresentation, distortions, those and more are trotted out
in weary procession, but never a fact is to be seen.

Or try this: tell the creationists to put up or shut up. No falsehoods, just s good fact or two.
If they agree, that will shut them up permanently.

Audie wrote:To be a creationist (yec /gap) has stern requirements. One has to be one or all three of
ignorant, mentally disturbed, or intellectually dishonest.

Kurieuo wrote: As Ed said, religion provides answers and responses to loss, death, tragedy, inequality, and injustice.
He concluded very clearly that such are simply placebo, "founded upon an empty throne".
In other words, better to face up to reality than live a lie.

Ed was also very straight-up and clear: "Atheism takes all of that away."
Atheism provides no answers, no responses, but just takes away such things.

Kenny wrote:But it needs to be pointed out, that atheists do not depend upon atheism for these things; atheism is not a substitute for religion. IOW we have ways of dealing with these things, they just don’t involve God.

RickD wrote:Do you have proof to back your assertion that God(s) don't exist?

Kenny wrote:

Kurieuo wrote: As Ed said, religion provides answers and responses to loss, death, tragedy, inequality, and injustice.
He concluded very clearly that such are simply placebo, "founded upon an empty throne".
In other words, better to face up to reality than live a lie.

Ed was also very straight-up and clear: "Atheism takes all of that away."
Atheism provides no answers, no responses, but just takes away such things.

My point is; Atheism only takes these things away if the answers are anchored in Theism. If you respond to inequality, tragedy, injustice and all the other things he mentioned via secular means; ( by getting involved with community, family, voting, etc.) atheism does nothing to take away from that.

Ken

RickD wrote:
Do you have proof to back your assertion that God(s) don't exist?

Edwardmurohy wrote:
That's a dead end, Rick. I don't need to prove a thing. All I need to do is not be convinced, which I'm not. I don't expect you to agree with any of that, but that's not a problem for me. The burden of proof rests squarely on the shoulders of the original claimant, and that's not me.

Also, I think someone asked me what would convince me that god existed. The best answer I can come up with is that if god existed he'd have no trouble convincing me of that fact, but he's the only one who could.

Kurieuo wrote: As Ed said, religion provides answers and responses to loss, death, tragedy, inequality, and injustice.
He concluded very clearly that such are simply placebo, "founded upon an empty throne".
In other words, better to face up to reality than live a lie.

Ed was also very straight-up and clear: "Atheism takes all of that away."
Atheism provides no answers, no responses, but just takes away such things.

Kenny wrote:My point is; Atheism only takes these things away if the answers are anchored in Theism. If you respond to inequality, tragedy, injustice and all the other things he mentioned via secular means; ( by getting involved with community, family, voting, etc.) atheism does nothing to take away from that.

Ken

RickD wrote:That's not how honest conversation works, Ed. You make an assertion, the least you can do is back your assertion with proof. That's the intellectual dishonesty I was referring to when I mentioned that atheists change the meaning of atheism, so they wouldn't have to back their belief that God doesn't exist.

RickD wrote:Frankly, with all the railing you do against certain people here, I really would have thought you would've put forth proof for your claim.

edwardmurphy wrote: Yeah, I suppose that's true. If you were never a theist then you never had any placebos to lose so atheism doesn't take them away.

edwardmurphy wrote:The part about responding to inequality, tragedy and injustice by secular means strikes me as a bit naive, though. The world can be a pretty dark place and the bad guys tend to win big and get away clean.

edwardmurphy wrote:If you're religious you can leave it in god's hands to square things at the pearly gates or whatever.

Kenny wrote:I don’t know of any religious people who are just willing to leave it in God’s hands as a means of responding to inequality, tragedy, or injustice; they are as quick to enact secular/legal means as you, I, or anyone else. Yeah they might say God can deal with them after they’re dead, but while they are alive, they want secular justice just like anyone else.

RickD wrote:Here Audie, fify:

Heck, why not wipe out evolution God too? All that is needed is one good solid contrary fact.

No disproof has ever been offered yet. Not one sad weary little fact.

Excuses, hoaxes, lies, strawmen, misrepresentation, distortions, those and more are trotted out
in weary procession, but never a fact is to be seen.

Or try this: tell the creationists atheists to put up or shut up. No falsehoods, just s a good fact or two.
If they agree, that will shut them up permanently.

Kenny wrote:I don’t know of any religious people who are just willing to leave it in God’s hands as a means of responding to inequality, tragedy, or injustice; they are as quick to enact secular/legal means as you, I, or anyone else. Yeah they might say God can deal with them after they’re dead, but while they are alive, they want secular justice just like anyone else.

Kurieuo wrote: If Ed is correct, then as an Atheist, you can't talk seriously of the things underlined if Atheism takes such away.

Kurieuo wrote: What you might call such, well another sees as their fair right, an opportunity and owed to them.

And "secular justice"? What on earth do you mean.

Kurieuo wrote:

Kenny wrote:

Kurieuo wrote: As Ed said, religion provides answers and responses to loss, death, tragedy, inequality, and injustice.
He concluded very clearly that such are simply placebo, "founded upon an empty throne".
In other words, better to face up to reality than live a lie.

Ed was also very straight-up and clear: "Atheism takes all of that away."
Atheism provides no answers, no responses, but just takes away such things.

My point is; Atheism only takes these things away if the answers are anchored in Theism. If you respond to inequality, tragedy, injustice and all the other things he mentioned via secular means; ( by getting involved with community, family, voting, etc.) atheism does nothing to take away from that.

Ken

Well then, it seems you have things rigged.
Either it takes away such things, or it doesn't.
It doesn't just take away for some, and not itself.
That's just like saying, "Everyone is wrong, oh... except for me!"
Ok then, more power to you on your own empty throne.

IceMobster wrote:

edwardmurphy wrote:


Could you explain it to me where are the corpses of all of those "in-between" animals. Correct me if I am wrong, but there should be a corpse of a giraffe whose neck is not as long as today's giraffes and not short, as the presumable animal the today's giraffe evolved from, right? Where is that evolutionary step? Shouldn't it be evident in corpses, as well? No transitional phase between animals has ever been found.

Considering everything is made from coincidence, why do you trust your reason? Why do you trust your consciousness?

How do you explain coincidence that produces symmetrical, connected and balanced form?

Audie wrote:To be a creationist (yec /gap) has stern requirements. One has to be one or all three of
ignorant, mentally disturbed, or intellectually dishonest.