(March 19, 2010 at 3:37 pm)RedFish Wrote: I think the problem might be with the question. If you want to provide concrete evidence for the existence of God, you first have to reach agreement about will be acceptable as 'concrete'. Otherwise Dogma will get in the way.
Agree on measurements acceptable to all parties? Not likely, I have to say. Impossible, more like.
As for me, any of these would be hard evidence that "God" exists:
* A stastically significant higher life expectancy for believers than nonbelievers.
* A statistically significant lower rate of life altering diseases among believers than nonbelievers.
* A stastically significant higher standard of living for believers than nonbelievers.
* A stastically significant lower rate of infant mortality for believers than nonbelievers.
* A stastically significant lower rate of blindness for believers than nonbelievers.
* A stastically significant lower rate of casualties for soldiers who are believers as opposed to nonbelievers.
* A stastically significant lower rate of property damage due to natural disasters for believers as opposed to nonbelievers.
etc...
I must add that these criteria would apply across all cultures. You can't show me the life expectancy of a believer who lives in Sweden and compare it to an atheist who lives in Somalia.
Now, I'm not saying that if you can show me any of these things that I would instantly believe. However, it would be stronger evidence than the usual guff I've seen.
Science flies us to the moon and stars. Religion flies us into buildings.
God allowed 200,000 people to die in an earthquake. So what makes you think he cares about YOUR problems?
God allowed 200,000 people to die in an earthquake. So what makes you think he cares about YOUR problems?