Proof that God exists

[KevinM1]

There's a crushing mound of evidence the sun will rise tomorrow as well.  It's a fun little chestnut we call orbital mechanics.  

This is an interesting approach.

I'm suggesting that the sun might not rise tomorrow because science and its observations are historical and do not provide any evidence of future events, observations like orbital mechanics. Your response to this is the sun will rise because of orbital mechanics?

This is the kind of circular reasoning a Christian might deploy when saying the bible is real because god says so in the bible. Somewhat unconvincing.

Are you saying that science cannot be predictive?

[Succubus]

I don't agree with you on this point. Science has evolved exclusively to meet human needs,

Like the "human need" to accelerate particles to near light speed, have them collide with other particles, and then record what happens in the aftermath?

For this alone I award you five internets.

[Angrboda]

What constitutes progress depends upon your values as to what would be good. Values, by their nature, are subjective. There is no such thing as an objective value. As a result, there can be no objective measure of progress, it's always going to be a subjective matter. To conclude anything from this impasse, such as "there is no progress" or that "science is a matter of faith", is to draw conclusions based upon nothing. Your conclusions are non sequiturs, and no amount of counter-examples to claims of progress will make your denials any more sensible. You have a stupid argument, complete with a non-point.

[The Grand Nudger]

@Cor
Tell you what..if I link you the recurring UN report on human progress..do you think you could give me a concrete example of how the whole thing is abritrary plucking of unscientific, unempirical data?  Here's last years.

http://hdr.undp.org/en/2014-report

What constitutes progress depends upon your values as to what would be good.  Values, by their nature, are subjective.  There is no such thing as an objective value.  As a result, there can be no objective measure of progress, it's always going to be a subjective matter.  To conclude anything from this impasse, such as "there is no progress" or that "science is a matter of faith", is to draw conclusions based upon nothing.  Your conclusions are non sequiturs, and no amount of counter-examples to claims of progress will make your denials any more sensible.  You have a stupid argument, complete with a non-point.

I think there are a great many objective measures of human progress, not all of them refer to the same particulars...as there are a great many components worth considering in human progress. I linked one above, the subjectivity being referred to here is a trivial subjectivity, imo (a pet peeve of mine). I have opinions you have opinions we all have opinions. In some peoples opinion more of set x belongs in human progress and less of set y...and others insists that none of set z is properly accounted for. We've got one here who asserts that progress is somehow not a thing or unscentific..for reasons™, and in the dame breath asks me about victims of progress.......

I'm sure we can reach an accomodation, lol..and even if we can't we can all work on our own little areas of interest and effect real and objective progress all the same. It's been working thusfar..despite everyone like..having an opinion, man.



Something being objective is an issue of it being able to be demonstrated independently of any given agent..not of it's deriving itself from no agent at all. Our being subjective agents with desires and values does not preclude objective metrics or objective progress in any meaningful way. It doesn't make every thing a "subjective matter". This would be an insensible deployment of the term objective. I asked Cor about simple metrics..and he responded by talking about something else. That;s not a rejection of progress or the notion of progress or even a criticism of their objectivity as metrics...it's just changing the subject.

I'd rate it no higher than lazy malcontentism...not really an argument. "In my opinion that's not human progress, hurr durr" - Fine. Call it fleeflarp. Have we made objective fleeflarp progress? Yes? Fin. I worry about the problems my children may inherit from me..but a longer lifespan doesn't register as one of them...and if we were being honest with ourselves..neither does Cor, since he launched off on diatribe about -other- problems such as pandemics rather then explain to me why a rational person wouldn't consider -increased lifespans- progress or indicative of progress.

[Amarok]

There must be an evolutionary reason why religion, in some form or other, has sprung up across the globe

Religion is like our ancestors tails it served a purpose once it does not anymore . Or to use a technological comparison once a War Chariot was a useful weapon but it is not anymore. I imagine religion was used to bind us together and start getting us to think about the big questions .

[The Grand Nudger]

Or maybe it was just super boring before the internet. Or maybe cripples who couldn't hunt needed to earn a living somehow. Tell a story, shake a cup. The state of religion today strongly indicates that the latter has always been -some- portion of "why religion exists", and what purpose it may have served in the foggy past.

Not for nothing..but fervently religious societies also show an incredible aptitude for killing off the other guy..which is a powerful advantage all to itself. People commonly mistake the terminology of evolutionary benefit as something beneficial in a positive sense....but that's not the case at all. All that would have to happen for religion to be over-represented as a matter of "evolutionary explanations" is that more religious people be left standing...and this can easily be due to the simple act of killing off and/or ostracizing the irreligious outliers and nonconformists...for centuries...this is going to have an impact on their rates of reproduction..and, consequently, how many children are born atheists, raised as atheists and continue to be atheists. It's notable how quickly a meaningful atheism seems to materialize, out of thin air, whenever some oppressive theocratic regime falls - and also how quickly those people seem to disappear when it regains it's authority.

Or...and this is my favorite..in the case of catholicsm it's even easier. The Mighty Cathol instructed catholics to fuck like rabbits and make a bunch of little catholics. They were going to breed their way to a solidified position of power. That there are now a bunch of little catholics..isn't indicative of any use for religion, then or now... only that the religious themselves have been used.

---

Goodness, I almost forgot the null hypothesis.  That religion -doesn't- and never did have any evolutionary purpose or benefit whatsoever.  That it;s an artifact of a succesful species of professional sentence blurters who -sometimes- make sounds about gods. That's how defects propogate in spite of evolutionary or selective pressure. They piggyback. Genetic disorders attached to an otherwise advantageous genome....we have a shitload of those..... in fact everything does. That our brains are susceptible to divine asshattery is more than compensated for by what our brains provide us. Related (or naturally inextricable) genetics that makes a crop super sweet can also make it super susceptible to disease pressure. It's the sweetness that causes us to clearcut a forest and plant more of it. That's the advantage. That's why that cultivar is over represented in the gene pool. Not the increased disease pressure. That shit is beyond useless...it;s actively counterproductive...and, tellingly (imo), so is this "god" business.

[Amarok]

Sigh science is not circular reasoning .

---

I'm suggesting that the sun might not rise tomorrow because science and its observations are historical and do not provide any evidence of future events, observations like orbital mechanics. Your response to this is the sun will rise because of orbital mechanics? 

Science is predictive 

In science, a prediction is a rigorous, often quantitative, statement, forecasting what would happen under specific conditions;

Seriously learn what science is  


Plus even if the sun did not come up tomorrow science theorize why that is . And alter it's models accordly .

[Cyberman]

Fwiw, the Sun is always rising, and setting. From the Earth's perspective, motion-wise it does almost nothing else. There's the ecliptic, of course, but guess what? That's predictable, too.

[KevinM1]

And just to pile on, antibiotic resistant bacteria didn't form because hospitals and/or doctors got lazy with hygiene and universal precautions. They formed because antibiotics were over-prescribed for generations, and (somewhat less importantly) by patients stopping their regimens the moment they felt better rather than finishing the prescription (there's a reason why doctors tell you to finish your prescription, folks).

[downbeatplumb]

And just to pile on, antibiotic resistant bacteria didn't form because hospitals and/or doctors got lazy with hygiene and universal precautions.  They formed because antibiotics were over-prescribed for generations, and (somewhat less importantly) by patients stopping their regimens the moment they felt better rather than finishing the prescription (there's a reason why doctors tell you to finish your prescription, folks).

Don't forget that American farmers give their animals antibiotics a s a matter of course.