Evidence God Exists: Part II

[tavarish]

What if there was a secluded society of great scientists that have never heard of gods or religion? If they were working at finding answers to the unknown... how could they ever reach the conclusion that a god created everything? If they've never observed any evidence of this god, how would they generate a concept of what a god is that conforms to their logic and scientific findings?

Isn't attributing an unknown to a god/ghost contradictory? Like saying I don't know... so I know this must've happened due to a god/ghost.

Here's the thing. God is in humanity's collective consciousness as the creator of life. Not aliens from outer space, not Harry Potter, and not the tooth fairy. Therefore, all experiments conducted in the area of life's origin have an underlying design to either prove or disprove God's existence. So whenever results fail to explain something scientifically, then it is not illogical to conclude that such results point towards the existence of God.

1. Stating something doesn't make it automatically true. Assertions by themselves aren't evidence of anything.
2. Origins of life are just that - life origins. They don't aim to prove or disprove something which is by definition untestable in conventional methodological naturalism.
3. Making a conclusion when the facts aren't in yet is intellectually dishonest. If something can be falsified and hasn't been, such as abiogenesis, then it is still viable. However, if something can't be falsified in any aspect, such as the illogical properties that some people apply to a higher power, then it has no merit as a scientific hypothesis.

You've been trying to spin this 100 different ways since the beginning of the thread and your idea hasn't taken off. Lack of evidence of a falsifiable theory isn't evidence that God exists, especially not your personal interpretation of what you think your particular religious doctrine describes.