What would evidence of a God even look like?

[Excited Penguin]

I'm talking about any kind of Gods here. I notice that we, atheists, generally tell theists they should show some evidence for their claims. I'm wondering, is any sort of evidence even possible? What kind of evidence could conceivably prove the existence of a supernatural being that created everything?

What would that even look like? 

This goes back to why I became an atheist in the first place. The original argument that propelled my atheism seems very solid to me even now, and might even justify a position of strong atheism. Thing is, given the nature of what we're talking about with theism, I really don't think it's a question science(in the "traditional" sense) can or should even attempt to answer. I think it's more of a philosophical question, if you will.

My argument goes like this. If there's a God that created the Universe(the Universe being everything in existence) then this God is either a part of the Universe or the Universe itself. It can't be merely a part of it, since it created it, so it must be the Universe itself. But then, there's no use calling it God. You might as well do away with the shady language and call it what it is. Nature, Universe, Cosmos. Whatever your secular preference.

Thoughts?

If the universe needed to be created why should the thing responsible for its creation be part of it?

Because if it's not a part of it, it doesn't exist. The universe is a word that is supposed to describe everything.

[Edwardo Piet]

What would evidence of God look like?

Unfalsifiable or IOW: indistinguishable from non-evidence.

It wouldn't look like anything. Observable evidence is falsifiable evidence and gods are unfalsifiable.

Even if God showed up and displayed his omnipotence: there would be no way to falsify him being a super advanced alien pretending to be God.

[bennyboy]

This is verging on numerology.  Unless you can show that these six folds give rise to these proportions, then these numbers are just coincidental.  Where do the six folds come from?  The tetrahedron?

It just worked out that way geometrically.

The first geometry is a sphere. The second is a pillar torus in vertical motion (universe spanning EM field)...picture the sphere as the skin of an orange and the pillar torus as the white strings that wrap up the inside of the peel and dive straight down vertically as a central combined pillar. It's a circuit.

The third geometry is a horizontal disk that spins 90 degrees off the central pillar and cuts the sphere into a top and bottom hemisphere.

That disk is a reflective membrane and cuts the EM pillar circuit into 2 phases of 2 phases each (4 total in the pillar) like shone below...ignore the lines outside the torus.



Here is where the elements come from; the four phase of the pillar torus are: Inwards/downs towards center (earth phase, toward the real material foundational point at center), downward/outwards from center to bottom (water phase, innately connected and traveling in same direction a earth phase, now cut in half by the disk), outwards/upwards is the air phase as water evaporates from air, the last phase is upwards/inwards back to the top as the fire phase (compression of air makes heat and rises more so that the surrounding air).

They are the 4rth geometry, reflectively manifest as 4 horizontal ring-tori by the disk and nest according to their original relationships in the Pillar: earth connected water as the central pillar traveling downwards, and air connected to fire as the upward wrapping magnetic counter-movement. Earth/water below, air/fire above. The disk separates them into individual expressions.

The 6 spaces come from the number of regions all these nested membranes give border and form to: Inside the 2 inner most ring tori, between them and the 2 middle ring tori, and 2 between the middle tori and the outer wrap of the pillar torus at the border of the universe. 6 total.


It can also be understood as a very simple dimensional transformation in order of degrees of freedom: The first degree is radial being (sphere). The second degree of freedom is polar motion inside the sphere (pillar torus). The 3rd degree is spin and counter spin (disk). The 4rth degree combines all the previous into a single shape, the ring torus. It is space in motion, in place, that has both vertical rotation and horizontal rotation.

A contained space-time that is both in motion, and still, and can expand.



A parallel possibility is that our physical cosmos in not in the space contained by the inner most torus, it might be it's brane surface.

Either way, the ring tori model predicts a slightly negative curvature of space-time, or saddle shaped.

I, too, enjoyed LSD when I was young.

[fdesilva]

If the universe needed to be created why should the thing responsible for its creation be part of it?

Because if it's not a part of it, it doesn't exist. The universe is a word that is supposed to describe everything.

Yes I should have made myself clear. In your definition of the term you are right. However in the normal use of the term the universe stand for the thing that seems to have originated with a Big Bang. Now for argument sake if there was something that is responsible for the creation for this Big Bang originating universe why would that something need to be a part of it? Like a tree A gives rise to a seed that give rise to a tree B. A is not a part of B. I agree you can define universe to mean everything and then all good. However having done that it would mean that we would still need to give a name to the creator of the Bid Bang universe if there be such a creator would you agree?

[Arkilogue]

I, too, enjoyed LSD when I was young.

So you have no real world concept or applications of sphere of space, point, field, straight line, curving return path, disk or circle?

You have no experience with Newtonian equal/opposite reaction?

Your appeal to ridicule is common and boring, try harder.

[Excited Penguin]

Because if it's not a part of it, it doesn't exist. The universe is a word that is supposed to describe everything.

Yes I should have made myself clear. In your definition of the term you are right. However in the normal use of the term the universe stand for the thing that seems to have originated with a Big Bang. Now for argument sake if there was something that is responsible for the creation for this Big Bang originating universe why would that something need to be a part of it? Like a tree A gives rise to a seed that give rise to a tree B. A is not a part of B. I agree you can define universe to mean everything and then all good. However having done that it would mean that we would still need to give a name to the creator of the Bid Bang universe if there be such a creator would you agree?

Here's the thing. I'm trusting scientists with my cosmological beliefs. As far as I know, there was no time before the Big Bang, nor is there evidence that there is anything out there other than everything that has originated with the Big Bang. So, I guess it comes down to how much you trust science when you encounter this argument. I trust it, and I came up with the argument myself while coincidentally debating a theist about the existence of God. You seem not to. That's fine. You can choose to disbelieve science in favor of your own fantasies. Good luck.

[chimp3]

This would be impressive :

An archeological dig in the Holy Land. An iron aged room is uncovered. Strange drawings on the walls that resemble Groucho Marx caricatures. Digging further a sealed box is found. The box is inscribed with the very date the scientists find it. Gregorian Calendar. Let us say today , August 20th 2016. Impressive! The box is opened and inside is a Blue Ray DVD. Astounding. The researchers rush to play the disc.
The scene unfolds : A crowd is preparing to stone an adulteress to death. A man resembling the mythical Jesus is making drawings in the sand with a stick. Suddenly a helicopter descends and lands near the crowd. That's right a helicopter. Groucho Marx is the pilot and he leaps out of the chopper. The adulteress throws off her veil and robe and is wearing a bikini. She is holding a poster that says -"Say "The Word" and You Win the Bird!".  Groucho and the woman give the cowering , groveling crowd the middle finger and fly off in the helicopter. The DVD ends with the date August 27th , 2016 12pm GMT and the words "See Ya then!".
August 27th, 2016 . The world is waiting with fear and wonder. 12pm GMT. Celestial Trumpets blast , the sky actually tears and reveals a view of another dimension. Groucho and the bikini clad adulteress descend waving happily at the crowds. Jesus riding on the back of a T-Rex comes next. Then a Zeus like patriarch wearing a sequined top hat holding a cane appears in the sky, does a little soft shoe and says "Ta Daaa !".

[bennyboy]

I, too, enjoyed LSD when I was young.

So you have no real world concept or applications of sphere of space, point, field, straight line, curving return path, disk or circle?

You have no experience with Newtonian equal/opposite reaction?

Your appeal to ridicule is common and boring, try harder.

Typical of LSD is the creative connection of ideas that others would not connect.  You have taken a few actual ideas, and recombined them into a bunch of made-up bullshit that you think is truthy enough to pass as an actual system of thought.

It's fun to play around with numbers.  It's fun to make shit up and stare at graph paper or a computer screen and pretend you've discovered something deep.  I get it.

[Excited Penguin]

Yes I should have made myself clear. In your definition of the term you are right. However in the normal use of the term the universe stand for the thing that seems to have originated with a Big Bang. Now for argument sake if there was something that is responsible for the creation for this Big Bang originating universe why would that something need to be a part of it? Like a tree A gives rise to a seed that give rise to a tree B. A is not a part of B. I agree you can define universe to mean everything and then all good. However having done that it would mean that we would still need to give a name to the creator of the Bid Bang universe if there be such a creator would you agree?

Here's the thing. I'm trusting scientists with my cosmological beliefs. As far as I know, there was no time before the Big Bang, nor is there evidence that there is anything out there other than everything that has originated with the Big Bang. So, I guess it comes down to how much you trust science when you encounter this argument. I trust it, and I came up with the argument myself while coincidentally debating a theist about the existence of God. You seem not to. That's fine. You can choose to disbelieve science in favor of your own fantasies. Good luck.

I meant while I was debating an atheist.

[fdesilva]

Yes I should have made myself clear. In your definition of the term you are right. However in the normal use of the term the universe stand for the thing that seems to have originated with a Big Bang. Now for argument sake if there was something that is responsible for the creation for this Big Bang originating universe why would that something need to be a part of it? Like a tree A gives rise to a seed that give rise to a tree B. A is not a part of B. I agree you can define universe to mean everything and then all good. However having done that it would mean that we would still need to give a name to the creator of the Bid Bang universe if there be such a creator would you agree?

Here's the thing. I'm trusting scientists with my cosmological beliefs. As far as I know, there was no time before the Big Bang, nor is there evidence that there is anything out there other than everything that has originated with the Big Bang. So, I guess it comes down to how much you trust science when you encounter this argument. I trust it, and I came up with the argument myself while coincidentally debating a theist about the existence of God. You seem not to. That's fine. You can choose to disbelieve science in favor of your own fantasies. Good luck.

Space time came into existence at the big bang that is why it begs the question what created it. If you find a dead body it could be murder, it could be natural causes or it could be suicide.