It doesn't negate the power of God.God say's he created everything.I believe Him.
kekekeke~ Good question! I'm a scientist myself, but no matter how far science advances I will always believe, because science can never explain reincarnation which I know for a fact to be true.
If you are a scientist then why would you say s
"science can never prove reincarnation" ??? The entire history of science would suggest otherwise..Thats what science does,.. Explain Things !!!!!!!
True... But I don't see how science could prove such a thing.. I mean.. there's not any evidence to follow or link people's souls from one life to the next. It would be great if someone came up with a way to prove it~ So much of science is purely speculation anyway.
Just remember that back when the world was "flat",..no-one would have dreamed that a person could walk on the moon..."One giant leap for mankind".
Basic science history.
Too true~ You win. Maybe one day science will be able to prove that reincarnation exists. But if someone tries to tell me it doesn't based on scientific fact, I won't believe them. We'll see what the future brings~ Science is great and the knowledge it gives us is useful and important for us to understand things and the way things work.. I just feel that sometimes science is too cut and dry.. too cold... but that's just me and my own opinion. I mean no offense to anyone by it. Maybe one day science can prove the unimaginable to be true as well~ We'll just have to wait and see.
I agree. <br />
Whether you believe that a flea is the creation of a god or of nature doesn't change a thing about the workings of the flea. <br />
If there is a God who thought this all through and created nature itself, then he/she created it exactly the way it works.
I have to laugh. My children and I discuss this all the time. My 10 year old loves the science chan. We are always saying: Well, they are coming closer to knowing how God created us. They are trying to explain God. People are foolish not to open their eyes to God's creation.
Maybe people are "foolish" to ascribe every tiny detail of a random universe to 'someone' called "God" ???
You can't tell me that the bulk of the bible is not nonsense.
I read parts of it all the time and also am familiar with the whole history of how that book was cobbled together...'Believing' in all that hogwash is absurd.
It doesn't prove nonexistence. From the stories i've heard, it is mostly still a theory, and no one is sure how it all ties in...we aren't even sure that the Big Bang happened...it too is theory, according to the things that seem to make sense to us at this time. <br />
I honestly believe that people are afraid to believe that God exists. He would be a reflection of Something that would be so totally beyond us. I think that it is hard for people to handle what it would mean.
To explain this I have come up with a simple statement that should clear up your confusion. In a court of law the plaintiff must have evidence proving the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. For me to believe the defendant is innocent regardless of any evidence would fly in the face of logic and rule of law.<br />
The higgs boson doesn't disprove god. It would go a very long way in explaining why we don't need god for creation. However proving that we don't need him, is not the same as saying this proves he doesn't exist. Anyone secure in their belief of god shouldn't be threatened or view it as an attack, it's not. It's simply an alternative explanation for why we are here and not much else. Also if You believe God created the rules the universe lives by then obviously the rules prove he exists to you. It's subjective use of ob<x>jective information.<br />
Lastly, the absence of evidence is not evidence, Occam's Razor holds that the simplest explanation is usually the right one. However, theories must have at least some evidence or a testable hypothesis to be taken seriously.<br />
I could say that the babylonians were the first civilization, ba<x>sed on an old history book. Now due to further research, we know that claim is not accurate. For me to state otherwise in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary is not only incorrect, but intentionally misleading and an example of blind faith in one's theories. Which some scientists are very guilty of as well.
Because they're just as biased a believers. The New Atheists in particular have even resorted to adopting evangelical B.S. to spread their message. What comes around goes around.
If they find a particle that everything stems from that does not mean God isn't the one that created that particle.I am going to believe till my last breath that God made everything,whether He did it from one particle I do not know.
let them believe what they want it doesnt affect anything
There is no evidence of god
There is no testable, legally admissable, non-anecdotal evidence. You can debate feeling the glow of god's love all you want, but us skeptics are busy trying to figure out why the universe works the way it does. That requires scientific method and evidence, both of which no creationist can debate without resorting to anger hackneyed "proofs" or long disproven studies or essays.
We grew from the bacteria... <br />
There is no way to prove non-existence by natural science. It is designed to work the other way around. What science people are up to is questioning the need for an interventionist God by explaining all sort of things previously was believed to be under constant awareness and control from "above". Historically speaking, these people did an amazing job so far, the list of things that not even religious people would think anymore to be controlled by God on a daily basis had grown very long. <br />
However, some stuff (goals, intentions, choices, values) was pushed out of the way, and we ended up with a scientific worldview in which our own actions are doomed to be unexplained or degraded to bio-chemical processes nobody understands. At least, not deep enough to bring it to the level of behavior that seems to be so important to us.<br />
From the standard scientific perspective, intentions, goals and choices became illusions, stuff to be explained with processes that are intention-less, goal-less, and choice-less and that is why the market for an interventionist God remains flourishing. With respect to the level of behavior that matters for us the most when we look at each other and ourselves, religious bedtime stories have not been replaced or challenged with anything else but aimless particles bumping into each other in a quite charming random fashion. Seriously, I would not blame anyone who's not getting it just yet.
That in my opinion is just more hogwash...Its a narrow biased view which misrepresents the truth..Just remember that the "truth" is a central theme to religion,.and yet they twist and distort the truth ALL the time.
That was part of my point. There is a difference though between a clock maker who cares about the clock that she made and and the clock maker who does not. But that was only where I have started...
Can't blame them, truth is a hard one.
This is why I don't think God exists:<br />
What is God? We can list the attributes of God: omniscience, omnipitence etc. We can we describe his role: Creator etc but no-one can really say what God really is. For instance if I say that Dave is fast, loyal, powerful and his job is to keep us safe have I told you what Dave is? No; there are many things that Dave could possibly be.<br />
So no-one can reasonably claim belief in God because no-one actually knows what God is to know if they believe in it or not. This is an extention of Meno's paradox: How do you recognise something when you don't know what it is?<br />
By extention saying "I see evidence for God everywhere" is a meaningless statement unless you can actually define God seperate from his attributes and role. Believers therefore have faith not only in God but also faith in that what they have labled as God actually is God; it's entirely possible that the ob<x>ject of their devotion is something other than God and they would have no way of knowing.<br />
So the theistic argument is stuck at the definition before it even gets onto arguments for the existance of God. Literally "God exists" has no semantic content; it means nothing because no-one can tell me what God is therefore to state its existance is meaningless.<br />
Everything that exists has a definition which allows humans to communicate what the ob<x>ject is and which defines a shared experience of the existance of something. If there's no definition then clearly there is no shared experience; even theists do not know what they mean when they say God. There are 3000 religions on earth and hundreds of thousands of denominations of those religions; there's thirty thousand denominations of Christianity alone; clearly not all theists are experiencing the same thing when they say "God". Which suggests that there is no universal thing called God; it's just a product of human culture.<br />
In that context asking how God does something is also meaningless because we haven't established what God is so we can't even begin to talk about its existance and until its existance has been established asking how it does something is asinine.
Well when you say "God is" what do you mean? What pops into your head when you say "God?"
We do not build religions and tax-havens around 'aliens'.
Neanderthals were fascinated by fire and no doubt thought it was 'magic' from some 'higher being'..If there was a 'God' all 'he' would need to do is show 'himself' in a definitive way and the argument would be over..
Not even all the christians in the world can get God to show one single sign that 'he' exists..Just write "I am God" in the clouds at a prime location..Will never happen. Aliens make crop circles and we don't say they are 'god'..The only ones doing miracles around here are humans.
No just on a day to day basis.
Never mind that Ketsan guy. He probably thinks rainbows are caused by sunlight shining through water droplets!
LMAO, love it Puck.
I had a deeply religious person tell me today that the God particle is..<br />
"absolute rubbish" !!!! So much for the whole "God is everywhere" ??<br />
Most peoples perception of God is primitive superstition ba<x>sed ,.which is fine by me if they keep it to themselves and stop trying to enforce their will (which is not "Gods" will )...onto others...The church is largely a 'control' freak structure ,.and many so called christians and other religious types ,are also control freaks.<br />
Whereas if there is a 'god' ,.well they sure are NOT a control freak.<br />
Confused ??? Well thats religion for ya...
Well thats good news..Theres more to this world than meets the eye,.and any dogma is really a dis-service to the truth..Religion is used to exploit any magic that is there. To get money and power over people using old books that if you know your history,.are a dogs breakfast of mumbo-jumbo passed around like a chinese whisper..No offence to people who have their own view for good reasons not based on brainwash.