Did Dawkins and Tyson say that and what are the implications.

[Cyberman]

I don't know; is there? You asked a straightforward question and I answered (a courtesy I'm still waiting from you, by the way). You're the one who seems obsessed with ascribing the word 'observable' to the scientific purview.

[Mark 13:13]

I don't know; is there? You asked a straightforward question and I answered (a courtesy I'm still waiting from you, by the way). You're the one who seems obsessed with ascribing the word 'observable' to the scientific purview.

OH yeah I forgot ; remind me I was to start a new thread.

[KichigaiNeko]

Maybe we should petition Tiberius to as a sub title to this site

"For Theists...everything your religion and your priests didn't tell you and don't want you to know" ????

Please note sarcasm

[Mark 13:13]

Maybe we should petition Tiberius to as a sub title to this site

"For Theists...everything your religion and your priests didn't tell you and don't want you to know" ????

Please note sarcasm

Would be nice if you could actually comment on the original point of the thread see post #1 before you chuck in something completely off track. I can understand people can drift of thread but most at least attempt to deal with the issue of the thread first.

[downbeatplumb]

I think the hypothesis of god can and has been tested.

Test 1.

Facts assigned to god, were they supernatural.

Beggining of the world-Not supernatural.
The variety of animals-Not supernatural

(at this point I got bored but you can see my point)

Test 2

Claims for the time scales mentioned in the bible and so "divinely inspired"are widely inaccurate.

Test 3

The efficacy of prayer.

Now this is an interesting one because it is the one area that god™ is supposed to still interact currently with the world.

So does prayer work......No it does not and it has been tested scientifically.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12082681/ns/...sual-test/

So can god be tested scientifically?
Yes.
Does the test show positive signs of god existence?
No.

[KichigaiNeko]

Would be nice if you could actually comment on the original point of the thread see post #1 before you chuck in something completely off track. I can understand people can drift of thread but most at least attempt to deal with the issue of the thread first.

Ock, yer poor wee lamb.

There is nothing to say about your OP. You misinterpreted the clip as others have shown you and you have obviously failed science 101 in high school.

Hence the sarcasm at having to educate you.

[Mark 13:13]

I think the hypothesis of god can and has been tested.

Test 1.

Facts assigned to god, were they supernatural.

Beggining of the world-Not supernatural.
The variety of animals-Not supernatural

(at this point I got bored but you can see my point)

OK explain how something can come into existence from nothing if that's natural explained by natural law. the points you put all extend from my first something so therefore can at best be seen as a natural extention of a supernatural cause.

Test 2

Claims for the time scales mentioned in the bible and so "divinely inspired"are widely inaccurate.

Not every Christian believes in taking the Bible in isolation as Word for Word written by God and literally correct in every place. For the majority of Christians the position is more complicated than that but still an Inspired collection of books.

Test 3

The efficacy of prayer.

Now this is an interesting one because it is the one area that god™ is supposed to still interact currently with the world.

So does prayer work......No it does not and it has been tested scientifically.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12082681/ns/...sual-test/

So can god be tested scientifically?
Yes.
Does the test show positive signs of god existence?
No.

the theology of prayer is much more complicated than the simplistic attempt at a supposed unbiased test. For a start they should have all been told they were being prayed for or none told in order to be a fair test. but the only test that matters for me is my own test and it works for me and from what i've seen upto 85% of Americans beleive it works for them

but if you want to look at the results in test then at least be like this guy who looking at a test that says the opposite to above doesn't just assume the test results are accurate and actually dissects it. If he an atheist unhappy that the result went for prayer was completely fair on your test I wonder would it even stand up for him.

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/g...odccu.html

In honesty if I were an Atheist I would not deny prayer works but rather ask why it works. There are plenty of "Natural explanations" around for why so accepting prayer works does not require you to beleive in GOD.

[KichigaiNeko]

[Zen Badger]

OK explain how something can come into existence from nothing if that's natural explained by natural law. the points you put all extend from my first something so therefore can at best be seen as a natural extention of a supernatural cause.

What did god spring from then?

If something can't come from nothing

[Mark 13:13]

Would be nice if you could actually comment on the original point of the thread see post #1 before you chuck in something completely off track. I can understand people can drift of thread but most at least attempt to deal with the issue of the thread first.

Ock, yer poor we lamb.

There is nothing to say about you OP. You misinterpreted the clip as others have shown you and you have obviously failed science 101 in high school.

Hence the sarcasm at having to educate you.

you say i misinterpreted the clip i say I havent. But then as shown earlier I was prepared to say why I have not misinterpeted it. I have misappropriated it for a purpose other than what Dawkins used it for but no I have not misinterpreted it. So would you like to deal with the question I ask using the quote as I have to raise another issue.

---

OK explain how something can come into existence from nothing if that's natural explained by natural law. the points you put all extend from my first something so therefore can at best be seen as a natural extention of a supernatural cause.

What did god spring from then?

If something can't come from nothing

Now were dealing with the Supernatural and as GOD is supernatural He is not constrained by the rules of the natural and GOD is Eternal He had no beginning.

---

So is a Scientific Theory a fact?

I gave you an excellent brief reference which addresses this question a few pages ago in the post which you've seen fit to ignore.

sorry missed it as busy answering so many. in short I have already outlined that GOD can't be tested and why... Transedental. GOD is not a scientific theory TRUE...GOD is a philosophical theory to explain the Cosmos that Scientific theory is so good at exploring but that is totally inadequete to explore beyond. You other points have been raised in other posts since and I've dealt with. But again apologies for not responding.

---

I see you are in full retreat and your post just says that to me. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTdMrrh9db4