When Atheists Can't Think Episode 1: No Evidence for God?

[Cyberman]

God is right there - just beyond the corner of your eye. No, don't turn to look; now see what you did, you scared him off. Now he's moved to the other side of you, always juuust out of sight.

[Delicate]

No, I conceded that GotG appeals are false.

I just don't make GotG appeals.

And you misunderstand the GotG appeal if you believe all it says is "God is in the gaps of our knowledge".

As a faulty appeal, GotG is not actually a claim, but an inference. It's the inference, from 'gaps' to 'God must be in the gaps'

So if your god isn't in the gaps where is it?

Does the question presuppose that God has to be in a particular place? Like an object of some kind?

People who claim to understand Christianity know that God isn't a physical entity bound to a location.

Which supports my view that people who claim to understand Christianity don't.

But laying that aside, can you explain why you presuppose God has to be somewhere?

[downbeatplumb]

So if your god isn't in the gaps where is it?

Does the question presuppose that God has to be in a particular place? Like an object of some kind?

People who claim to understand Christianity know that God isn't a physical entity bound to a location.

Which supports my view that people who claim to understand Christianity don't.

But laying that aside, can you explain why you presuppose God has to be somewhere?

Have I gone around being an expert on Christianity? I don't think I have! I have read the shitty tome that is the bible but I would not colour myself an expert, I'm not an expert on Hinduism, Buddhism or any of the other myth based fantasies that people believe in either. When people introduce supernatural things into a thing I tend to put them all in the same box marked bullshit, show one thing that has ever in the history of the world been proved in scientifically verified tests to have a supernatural cause and I'll revisit it.
Oh and god has to either be somewhere or nowhere so I take this as an admission on your part that god is non-existent.

[Jenny A]

So if your god isn't in the gaps where is it?

Does the question presuppose that God has to be in a particular place? Like an object of some kind?

People who claim to understand Christianity know that God isn't a physical entity bound to a location.

Which supports my view that people who claim to understand Christianity don't.

But laying that aside, can you explain why you presuppose God has to be somewhere?

I suppose that there is no possible evidence of god unless he affects the world in some demonstrable way. If not there is nothing to debate as god is an idea no more.

[robvalue]

"Outside of time and space" sounds to me like "doesn't exist".

It could be outside of our timeline, sure. But if it doesn't have its own timeline, it would appear that it can't do anything. And if it is "outside of space" that implies that it has some sort of presence to actually be somewhere; in which case, whatever place that is will be a different kind of "space". If it isn't actually anywhere at all, then saying it's outside of space is irrelevant.

And, of course, it's immediately unfalsifiable. No can have evidence for or against it, it becomes a useless assumption and nothing more. How did anyone discover it except through stories?

I'm often told it's all beyond human comprehension. By a human, who has comprehended a whole lot about it.

[Cyberman]

If something exists outside of our space and time and can somehow have any influence within it, it should leave evidence.

If something exists outside of our space and time but cannot influence anything within it, it can safely be ignored as equivalent to non-existent. So either "God" ought to leave fingerprints on our reality, in the form of violated physics, every time it does anything or it's at least as near to non-existent as makes no odds. The continual silence on the evidence front ought to be a clue.

[robvalue]

That's right. It sure sounded like it spent a lot of time firmly inside our time and space in the bible and such. As our ability to detect and explain things has improved, so god's presence has receded. Once it became clear science could start to reach the boundaries of time and space, suddenly God had to be vacated from the whole lot. It couldn't do for someone to find him and start asking some questions.

This awesome vid by Darkmatter2525 helps illustrate the idea of separate timelines.

http://youtu.be/iDdiCYTK160

[Delicate]

Does the question presuppose that God has to be in a particular place? Like an object of some kind?

People who claim to understand Christianity know that God isn't a physical entity bound to a location.

Which supports my view that people who claim to understand Christianity don't.

But laying that aside, can you explain why you presuppose God has to be somewhere?

Have I gone around being an expert on Christianity? I don't think I have! I have read the shitty tome that is the bible but I would not colour myself an expert, I'm not an expert on Hinduism, Buddhism or any of the other myth based fantasies that people believe in either. When people introduce supernatural things into a thing I tend to put them all in the same box marked bullshit, show one thing that has ever in the history of the world been proved in scientifically verified tests to have a supernatural cause and I'll revisit it.
Oh and god has to either be somewhere or nowhere so I take this as an admission on your part that god is non-existent.

Don't worry, atheism falls into my bullshit category so I know what you mean.

But from your demand for evidence I take it your a devotee of scientism.

And from your implication that if something exists it has to exist somewhere, I take it you're a materialist.

Both views are unjustified at best and false at worse.

Once you get rid of these myths, you can ask more sensible questions about God.

Can you explain why you believe them?

[robvalue]

Edit: forget it. It's become clear I'm wasting my virtual breath.

[Delicate]

"Outside of time and space" sounds to me like "doesn't exist".

It could be outside of our timeline, sure. But if it doesn't have its own timeline, it would appear that it can't do anything. And if it is "outside of space" that implies that it has some sort of presence to actually be somewhere; in which case, whatever place that is will be a different kind of "space". If it isn't actually anywhere at all, then saying it's outside of space is irrelevant.

And, of course, it's immediately unfalsifiable. No can have evidence for or against it, it becomes a useless assumption and nothing more. How did anyone discover it except through stories?

I'm often told it's all beyond human comprehension. By a human, who has comprehended a whole lot about it.

I was going to respond to this, but you've given up.