The Truth

Originally posted by buckky
One truth is one, and one is two. Gravity is another truth even though we really don't understand it. There are many truths so why is God not a Truth ? Because we can't scientifically proof the existence is God. What if we could ? Would it change people's behavoir in any way ? What kinds of things would change in the world if God was a solid fact instead of a ...[text shortened]... personality. I'm confused to the whole question God, and the belief system that rules today

If there was definitive evidence of a/several/many deity's then the question would cease to be weather the divine exists, but weather or not to worship it/them. (my response would be not to, but that's just me)
For other speculation feel free to write yourself a novel set in a world where god/s exist and see what your imagination can concoct :-)

However there is no evidence for the existence of the supernatural (in any form) and moreover there isn't the evidence you would expect to find if the supernatural existed. Thus science can say with considerable confidence that on the balance of probability that there is no god, and no supernatural.
Therefore I would argue that basing your life/work/morals one the idea that there is a god to be pointless and wasteful, but then so is the whole human race.

Originally posted by scherzo
Chopin's Scherzo in Bb Minor

By name and key I don't recall it. But I am sure I have heard it.

Chopin is a fine composer.

I like the scherzo to Bruckner's 9th Symphony.

Originally posted by scherzo
Not on my "authoritative say;" on that of science, which is provable, unlike religion, which is, to quote some random guy, "hogwash."

Unfortunately, you have a bit of a misconception here.

The only things that can be 'proved' in the sense that they are fundamental truths, are areas where we define the rules (like maths and logic). Science in general is not about 'proving' things in that sense.

Neither Einsteins relativity theory or Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection can be ultimately proven. However, they are scientific theories because they allow us to make predictions that are testable and that could disprove them if they are wrong. That is the fundamental difference between science-based assertion and a religion-based assertion: even if they are right, neither one can be proved to be right. But if they are wrong, only the scientific assertion can be proved to be wrong. If the scientific assertion is tested repeatedly and never found to be wrong, then we can tentatively say that it might be right.

That is where the strength lies in science and that is why religion, in the end, is pointless fantasy, comforting though it may be.

--- Penguin.

Originally posted by Penguin
Unfortunately, you have a bit of a misconception here.

The only things that can be 'proved' in the sense that they are fundamental truths, are areas where we define the rules (like maths and logic). Science in general is not about 'proving' things in that sense.

Neither Einsteins relativity theory or Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection ca ...[text shortened]... hy religion, in the end, is pointless fantasy, comforting though it may be.

--- Penguin.

Let's say a gang of men broke into your house and tied you up. Then they decided to gang rape your sister or any female members of your family in the house.

One of them says to the others, "My past reading of the Bible reminds me that we are about to commit a sin against God and against this man who we have tied up. Let's not do this sinful thing."

Would you desuade him on the grounds that religion is pointless fantasy and that it cannot be scientifically proven that God exists?

Would you even encourage him that he has indeed touched on some truth that is important. Or would you not care because this fear of offending God in him is a "religious" thing which is a pointless fantasy, an unprovable assertion only good to give him false comfort?

Originally posted by scherzo
Not on my "authoritative say;" on that of science, which is provable, unlike religion, which is, to quote some random guy, "hogwash."

scherzo, old doom, I know it is hard for you to get the big picture when you have such a small screen, but judging by the sage saying, "What you don't know can't hurt you," you're practically invulnerable. People say that you are the perfect idiot. I say that you are not perfect but you are doing all right.

Perhaps your whole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others.

Originally posted by buckky
One truth is one, and one is two. Gravity is another truth even though we really don't understand it. There are many truths so why is God not a Truth ? Because we can't scientifically proof the existence is God. What if we could ? Would it change people's behavoir in any way ? What kinds of things would change in the world if God was a solid fact instead of a ...[text shortened]... personality. I'm confused to the whole question God, and the belief system that rules today

The existence of God is a fact, and it requires no faith at all to know it.

The atheist claims there is no evidence in the face of all that exists, which IS the evidence for the existence of a creator (God).

Originally posted by scherzo
Not on my "authoritative say;" on that of science, which is provable, unlike religion, which is, to quote some random guy, "hogwash."

has science proven god doesn't exist?

has science proven superstring theory to be false?

since science has done none of the above, don't you think it is poor logic to assume god doesn't exist and superstring theory as "maybe yet to be proven"?

Originally posted by josephw
The existence of God is a fact, and it requires no faith at all to know it.

The atheist claims there is no evidence in the face of all that exists, which IS the evidence for the existence of a creator (God).

no

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
no

Yes!

Originally posted by jaywill
Let's say a gang of men broke into your house and tied you up. Then they decided to gang rape your sister or any female members of your family in the house.

One of them says to the others, "My past reading of the Bible reminds me that we are about to commit a sin against God and against this man who we have tied up. Let's not do this sinful thing."

...[text shortened]... hich is a pointless fantasy, an unprovable assertion only good to give him false comfort?

I know how I would answer this question;

I would NOT point out his absurdity of his religious dilutions -NOT because his absurd religious dilutions are correct; of course his dilutions are not correct, but because I don’t want them to rape my sister etc. So what is your point?

Are you implying that you have to read the Bible just to know that rape is a cruel unfriendly act?

If a gang of men broke into my house and tied me up but, despite that act, they were capable of sympathy then it would be possible for me to persuade them to not rape my sister by appealing to their better nature and, providing they are quite rational and atheistic and not delusional, do this without having to mention something that they would regard as completely irrelevant to the issue such as the Bible or “god” or “gods” etc.

I do not know how I should react if they were delusional theists -perhaps in that case I should lie by pretending they should not rape my sister because of the Bible?

Originally posted by jaywill
Well, My Ultimate Doom, why on your authoritative say so should I regard you as anymore than a garden variety crackpot to unilaterally announce to mankind that "God does not exist." ?


Who are you ? Have you been everywhere throughout the universe and through all time?

Could it be that God exists somewhere you have not been at some time?

…Well, My Ultimate Doom, why on your authoritative say so should I regard you as anymore than a garden variety crackpot to unilaterally announce to mankind that "God does not exist." ? …

What do you mean by “to Unilaterally announce to mankind that "God does not exist." “?
Wouldn’t all atheists “announce to mankind that "God does not exist."“ if they were so asked? -in which case it wouldn’t be his “Unilaterally” announcement -would it!

Originally posted by jaywill
Primate Crap !


Science rests on assumptions which science itself cannot prove to be truth.

Where's your formula demonstrating conclusively the non-existence of God ? Publish it and the contraversy is over.

Save time.

…Science rests on assumptions which science itself cannot prove to be truth.…

Firstly, science can give “proof that a hypothesis is probably true given certain assumptions carefully chosen and designed to be hard for most people to refute and many of those assumptions are qualified assumptions with some evidence to support them. Sometimes those assumptions have so much evidence supporting them that those “assumptions” are actually really regarded as “facts”.

Secondly, isn’t it true that religion rests on assumptions which religion itself cannot prove to be truth? (Especially the assumption that there exists a god)

Originally posted by jaywill
By name and key I don't recall it. But I am sure I have heard it.

Chopin is a fine composer.

I like the scherzo to Bruckner's 9th Symphony.

Not heard Bruckner. If you want to discuss music, though, take it to Culture or PM.

Originally posted by Penguin
Unfortunately, you have a bit of a misconception here.

The only things that can be 'proved' in the sense that they are fundamental truths, are areas where we define the rules (like maths and logic). Science in general is not about 'proving' things in that sense.

Neither Einsteins relativity theory or Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection ca ...[text shortened]... hy religion, in the end, is pointless fantasy, comforting though it may be.

--- Penguin.

Ah, but some things in science can be proven. Math, true, is founded on axioms (why does 1+1=2, why does 2^2=4, etc.). You cannot prove anything in math without relying on these unprovable axioms to some extent. However, science is provable. There is evidence to support scientific theory, which is why it is so believable, especially when compared to most religions.

Originally posted by Scriabin
scherzo, old doom, I know it is hard for you to get the big picture when you have such a small screen, but judging by the sage saying, "What you don't know can't hurt you," you're practically invulnerable. People say that you are the perfect idiot. I say that you are not perfect but you are doing all right.

Perhaps your whole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others.

Thank you for the compliment. 😞