Scientific evidence of God by an atheist (Where mankind is one likely type of God)

[ProgrammingGodJordan]

Michael's less successful cousin, ProgrammingGod.

I observe unfortunately, that the most influence I have had in my country, is to directly aid in the introduction of neural network based subject amidst one of my country's universities.

I furthermore observe a likely limitation; I have began encoding 'God' using modern machine learning lemma (as Google, Microsoft etc are doing), and I know full well that my medium-bound machine learning laptop cannot reduce the code regimes that I have subsumed.

See 'thought curvature' for the machine learning lemma to which I am referring.

BTW, Are you referring to Michael I. Jordan, machine learning professor?


If so, I would entirely observe your commentary, as accurate.

---

I think this shows that the word "God" is next to meaningless, because everyone has their own definition. That's my position, ignosticism. The only useful definition I have is "intelligent creator", and the term is relative. Being a "God" of a VR I create obviously doesn't not make me "God" with respect to this reality.

It's a fair hypothesis that this is some sort of simulation, yeah. It appears unfalsifiable to me, although it's certainly interesting. I'm concerned there is a fallacy of composition included in the hypothesis though, and it requires several assumptions.

It's much more interesting than "God says don't wank or he'll cry and burn your bum".

Tradition is often wrong. (Only the theistic mind adheres to the concept of omniscient, omnipotent deities)

Thusly, on statistical observation, God/Creator is likely properly, naturally statistically definable as stipulated in the original post.



...
Albeit, I observe that indeed, God the word becomes quite 'irrelevant' (As I stipulate on my portfolio page which is available on request) whence we are all likely God-bound (if not brain damaged) in capability.

God therein is likely no longer special spaghetti..