Evidence for God from Science

Canuckster1127 wrote:

RickD wrote:

ManOfScience wrote:

A Y323 wrote:That would be deception, a form of lying, which is a sin. God can't sin.

It's analogous to placing fossils in the sedimentary rock all over the Earth, isn't it?

I see how you could make that analogy. You do realize this is an Old Earth website, and most people here don't believe that God created the earth with fossils already in place?

That realization does seem to be missing. Also, there appears to be an assumption of MoS part that the existence of God is only "necessitated" by invoking God of the Gap arguments. That's a very telling assumption. It explains to me why the material and statements being made are so circular. It seems to be mistaking "cause agent" with "methodology."

There are past examples of christians and other theists throughout history invoking "God of the Gaps" arguments in which the claim is made that something cannot be explained and therefore that proves the existence of God. To be fair too, I see that type of argument made from atheists as well that assumes that unexplainable phenomenon today do in fact have a natural explanation and that given enough time, observation and data any mystery can be solved.

For an atheist, that argument is exclusive as only that which is natural and methodological can suffice. Yet it's interesting to me to see militant atheists who make claims that are beyond what the evidence can substantiate and don't appear to recognize that they're making the same type of mistake that they claim people of faith do when they gloss over their gaps and assume that the scientific method is its own proof.

Anyway, I'm watching and will jump in when warranted. Carry on .....

I missed this. Great points.

Wow, I can't see that as being anything more than a setup for argument. That statement is something I'd expect to see in a signature, not a thread.

Gman wrote:It all boils down to that God wins... Science can't explain it, philosophy can't explain it, don't waste your time on silly stuff. Everything else is temporary.

Invest in beauty, invest in love, invest in wisdom. Don't play the fools game.... Make smart choices in this life.. Always go for the gold.. Invest in God!!!

This kind of thread structure is unwelcome.

You are asking for people to argue with you and are being a bad example of a christian. This site is devoted to combining what we know about modern science and the existance of God. There are two sides of every story and this is like an Aethist saying "It all boils down to that God loses .. . Science can explian it" You wouldn't be too happy if you saw that would you?

Enginseer wrote:

Gman wrote:It all boils down to that God wins... Science can't explain it, philosophy can't explain it, don't waste your time on silly stuff. Everything else is temporary.

Invest in beauty, invest in love, invest in wisdom. Don't play the fools game.... Make smart choices in this life.. Always go for the gold.. Invest in God!!!

This kind of thread structure is unwelcome.

You are asking for people to argue with you and are being a bad example of a christian. This site is devoted to combining what we know about modern science and the existance of God. There are two sides of every story and this is like an Aethist saying "It all boils down to that God loses .. . Science can explian it" You wouldn't be too happy if you saw that would you?

I see you like to post but have you taken the time to read every page of every thread you posted on?-
-
-
-

Enginseer wrote:

Gman wrote:It all boils down to that God wins... Science can't explain it, philosophy can't explain it, don't waste your time on silly stuff. Everything else is temporary.

Invest in beauty, invest in love, invest in wisdom. Don't play the fools game.... Make smart choices in this life.. Always go for the gold.. Invest in God!!!

This kind of thread structure is unwelcome.

You are asking for people to argue with you and are being a bad example of a christian. This site is devoted to combining what we know about modern science and the existance of God. There are two sides of every story and this is like an Aethist saying "It all boils down to that God loses .. . Science can explian it" You wouldn't be too happy if you saw that would you?

Who resigned and appointed you as moderator?

Enginseer wrote:
This kind of thread structure is unwelcome.

Really? Well when modern science assigns the origin of the universe and all life in it to pure random chance it does an incalculable disservice to science, because it reduces scientific investigation not only to chaos but to sheer absurdity.

Enginseer wrote:You are asking for people to argue with you and are being a bad example of a christian. This site is devoted to combining what we know about modern science and the existance of God. There are two sides of every story and this is like an Aethist saying "It all boils down to that God loses .. . Science can explian it" You wouldn't be too happy if you saw that would you?

Science could never explain it.. If you have the scientific evidence that disproves God then please share it..

Gman wrote:

Enginseer wrote:
Science could never explain it.. If you have the scientific evidence that disproves God then please share it..

Nobody has scientific evidence that disproves god. Yet there is two sides to this coin as there is no evidence for God. Each side has 'hints' that point to one outcome, yet neither has any scientific proof.

To test something it must be observed, if God is of a higher power, he will never be observed and therefore cannot be proven/disproven.

Enginseer wrote:

Gman wrote:

Enginseer wrote:
Science could never explain it.. If you have the scientific evidence that disproves God then please share it..

Nobody has scientific evidence that disproves god. Yet there is two sides to this coin as there is no evidence for God. Each side has 'hints' that point to one outcome, yet neither has any scientific proof.

To test something it must be observed, if God is of a higher power, he will never be observed and therefore cannot be proven/disproven.

Does the Universe exist?

Where did it come from - how did it begin?

How much observation must it take to prove the Universe exist?
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:

Enginseer wrote:

Gman wrote:

Enginseer wrote:
Science could never explain it.. If you have the scientific evidence that disproves God then please share it..

Nobody has scientific evidence that disproves god. Yet there is two sides to this coin as there is no evidence for God. Each side has 'hints' that point to one outcome, yet neither has any scientific proof.

To test something it must be observed, if God is of a higher power, he will never be observed and therefore cannot be proven/disproven.

Does the Universe exist?

Where did it come from - how did it begin?

How much observation must it take to prove the Universe exist?
-
-
-

It's obvious the universe exists, I think therefore I am.

How did it begin: Some people believe it was due tot he Big Bang Theory.

How much observation must it take to prove the Universe exists: It only takes a single test, The Earth is in the Universe, So I'm pretty sure we exist?



Where did it come from: This is the key question. I was reading on the front page that Einstein 'invented' a cosmological constant to avoid admitting the universe had a beginning. He admitted that it was the single greatest blunder of his scientific career. The writer of the front page goes on to say "Recognize what Albert Einstein understood about the universe - that its amazing design demands the existence of a creator God."

Now the fact it has a beginning means an intelligent creator cannot be discredited, yet at the same time it doesn't mean it's the only answer.

The cosmological constant has been re-introduced after cosmological acceleration was observed, yet the Universe is still thought to have a beginning.

Steven Hawkins however claims that there could be many universes, creating themselves and disappearing again. Yet some of these universes do not destroy themselves but expand. Some believe that our universe is simply a branch of of a 5 dimensional universe, which is a branch of a 7 dimensional universe which is a branch of a 9 dimensional universe etc.

Either way their are alternative theories to intelligent design. Also, if you're a Christian AND you acknowledge the big bang theory, what are your thoughts on the eventual re-collapse of the universe?

If all the worthy ascend to heaven then the need of a physical universe is no longer needed? That's just my take on it, but add your own opinion.

EDIT: I also notice that there is no answer to why baryons and anti-baryons are asymmetrical, in this way the only current theories are the fact that there is a God or that it was formed by Baryogensis [Yet even this theory is extremely weak]

Enginseer wrote:...It's obvious the universe exists, I think therefore I am.

How did it begin: Some people believe it was due tot he Big Bang Theory.

How much observation must it take to prove the Universe exists: It only takes a single test, The Earth is in the Universe, So I'm pretty sure we exist?

Where did it come from: This is the key question. I was reading on the front page that Einstein 'invented' a cosmological constant to avoid admitting the universe had a beginning. He admitted that it was the single greatest blunder of his scientific career. The writer of the front page goes on to say "Recognize what Albert Einstein understood about the universe - that its amazing design demands the existence of a creator God."

Now the fact it has a beginning means an intelligent creator cannot be discredited, yet at the same time it doesn't mean it's the only answer.

The cosmological constant has been re-introduced after cosmological acceleration was observed, yet the Universe is still thought to have a beginning.

Steven Hawkins however claims that there could be many universes, creating themselves and disappearing again. Yet some of these universes do not destroy themselves but expand. Some believe that our universe is simply a branch of of a 5 dimensional universe, which is a branch of a 7 dimensional universe which is a branch of a 9 dimensional universe etc.

Either way their are alternative theories to intelligent design. Also, if you're a Christian AND you acknowledge the big bang theory, what are your thoughts on the eventual re-collapse of the universe?

If all the worthy ascend to heaven then the need of a physical universe is no longer needed? That's just my take on it, but add your own opinion.

EDIT: I also notice that there is no answer to why baryons and anti-baryons are asymmetrical, in this way the only current theories are the fact that there is a God or that it was formed by Baryogensis [Yet even this theory is extremely weak]

Romans 1:20, 21, "For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened." NASB
-
-
-

Enginseer wrote:Nobody has scientific evidence that disproves god. Yet there is two sides to this coin as there is no evidence for God. Each side has 'hints' that point to one outcome, yet neither has any scientific proof.

To test something it must be observed, if God is of a higher power, he will never be observed and therefore cannot be proven/disproven.

Test it all you want... By our tests we find that with our intelligent designers (scientists) that we can't even produce the simplest life forms from inorganic matter. Therefore it can be tested to some degree.. Although we can't necessarily "prove" God 100% via science, that doesn't mean that we can't have 100% convictions either or come to the most logical conclusion...

Gman wrote:

Enginseer wrote:Nobody has scientific evidence that disproves god. Yet there is two sides to this coin as there is no evidence for God. Each side has 'hints' that point to one outcome, yet neither has any scientific proof.

To test something it must be observed, if God is of a higher power, he will never be observed and therefore cannot be proven/disproven.

Test it all you want... By our tests we find that with our intelligent designers (scientists) that we can't even produce the simplest life forms from inorganic matter. Therefore it can be tested to some degree.. Although we can't necessarily "prove" God 100% via science, that doesn't mean that we can't have 100% convictions either or come to the most logical conclusion...

I'm constantly surprised at the shear rate of advancement in scientific study. Did you know scientists have recently created a material with a negative refractive index within the visible light spectrum [invisibility here I come!]. As long as people are working on the mystery of life, only progression can be made. Time and research, I believe will reveal all.

Enginseer wrote: I'm constantly surprised at the shear rate of advancement in scientific study. Did you know scientists have recently created a material with a negative refractive index within the visible light spectrum [invisibility here I come!]. As long as people are working on the mystery of life, only progression can be made. Time and research, I believe will reveal all.

Yes... Using intelligent designers to create.

I'm actually fathoming the mysteries of God also.. Very fascinating stuff.. Far more interesting than studying UFO's and such. Studying the creator, the master of universe and everything we see.. Incredible.