A One In An infinity Chance That God Exists. What Do You Guys Think?

[frankiej]

No. Athiests just don't believe in god. Athiests can still believe in bullshit. That just doesn't include god.

I know an atheist who believes in ghosts. Fuck knows why.

[Tempus]

No. Athiests just don't believe in god. Athiests can still believe in bullshit. That just doesn't include god.

Agreed. I hate it when people say atheists don't believe in bullshit. Plenty do! Plenty of them are also adept at misquoting / quote mining the Bible*, using flawed logic and all sorts of other things.

*There's actually a documentary - I think it's called The God Who Wasn't There (I'm not sure if that's the one) - that quotes Jesus in the Bible as saying that those who won't follow him should be brought before him and killed. What the creator(s) of the documentary failed to make clear was that Jesus was telling a parable; it was a king in the parable who said that. It wasn't a sentiment expressed by Jesus. I actually paused it the moment I saw the quote on the screen and picked up my Bible to have a look at the context. When I discovered the truth I just stopped watching the documentary. What a pathetic and childish tactic.

[amateurlyinsightful]

Cato, there is a philosophical argument made my Aristotle I believe, titled "the invisible rabbit", which says everything has a one in an infinity chance of existing, and his argument is right, but how does that disprove my argument

---

What Dawkins meant is that he believes there is a one in an infinity chance that God exists. There is no way to disprove god's existence. Therefore, saying for sure there is no god is idiotic

[Jackalope]

Pfft... everyone knows it's 50/50. Either it happens or it doesn't. Derp.

[Welsh cake]

This is the reason I became Atheist. Imagine there's an all knowing, all powerful, benevolent God that

What's a god?

Now, there's the argument that you can't fathom God's existence.

The unfathomable is just the unfathomable. You can't make any argument for or against it based on that premise alone because to do so is to assert you fathom that something is unfathomable, you can't explain it, therefore you can, which is an utter nonsense.

[Cyberman]

Seems to me that one divided by infinity is as close to calling that one nonexistent as it's possible to get without closing the door entirely. However, once we start examining the plausibility of particular god claims, such as the Yaweh which created everything in six days etc, then the likelihood of that door closing increases in direct ratio.

[Cato]

Cato, there is a philosophical argument made my Aristotle I believe, titled "the invisible rabbit", which says everything has a one in an infinity chance of existing, and his argument is right, but how does that disprove my argument

---

What Dawkins meant is that he believes there is a one in an infinity chance that God exists. There is no way to disprove god's existence. Therefore, saying for sure there is no god is idiotic

I agree that making a definitive claim that god does not exist is logically absurd, but there is absolutely no evidence for god so why consider it?

Your 1/∞ probability for the existence of god is flawed. All you have claimed is that god is one 'imagined' entity in an infinite set of 'imagined' creative forces. This says absolutely nothing about what actually created the universe and therefore is not a probability of existence.

Whatever created the universe (even if just the consequence of an as yet unkown natural law) exists and despite our ignorance can be said to have the probability of existence of 1. All other imagined creative forces have the probability of existence of 0. Unless of course there are other creative forces, but just not the one responsible for the creation of our universe.

We can say something 'probably' exists such as the Higgs boson and dark matter because the mathematical models predict them, but we still have the obligation of providing empirical evidence before stating 'there it is'.

[Taqiyya Mockingbird]

No. Athiests just don't believe in god. Athiests can still believe in bullshit. That just doesn't include god.

True enough. I suppose I was speaking mostly for myself there, with perhaps a bit of wishful thinking, heh...

[Adjusted Sanity]

It's fine. I believe in bullshit anyway, so I can't talk much.

[amateurlyinsightful]

Cato, there is a philosophical argument made my Aristotle I believe, titled "the invisible rabbit", which says everything has a one in an infinity chance of existing, and his argument is right, but how does that disprove my argument

---

What Dawkins meant is that he believes there is a one in an infinity chance that God exists. There is no way to disprove god's existence. Therefore, saying for sure there is no god is idiotic

I agree that making a definitive claim that god does not exist is logically absurd, but there is absolutely no evidence for god so why consider it?

Your 1/∞ probability for the existence of god is flawed. All you have claimed is that god is one 'imagined' entity in an infinite set of 'imagined' creative forces. This says absolutely nothing about what actually created the universe and therefore is not a probability of existence.

Whatever created the universe (even if just the consequence of an as yet unkown natural law) exists and despite our ignorance can be said to have the probability of existence of 1. All other imagined creative forces have the probability of existence of 0. Unless of course there are other creative forces, but just not the one responsible for the creation of our universe.

We can say something 'probably' exists such as the Higgs boson and dark matter because the mathematical models predict them, but we still have the obligation of providing empirical evidence before stating 'there it is'.

It's still refutes God as being the creator of everything