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

[ProgrammingGodJordan]

If you believe something is probable you believe it more than not believe it. You're a theist.

You do have beliefs. You believe you're right, for starters. But you're wrong.

Are you mentally ill?

One needs not BELIEF in the OBSERVATION of PROBABILITIES.

[Edwardo Piet]

Yes I probably am mentally ill but I'm less of an idiot than you are.

[ProgrammingGodJordan]

Intelligent life inevitably develops AI and/or gains the ability to create simulated universes, these "gods" create simulated realities which inevitably produce intelligent life, which evolves to the point of "godhood" and it can run simulations, so on and forth. That's all he's saying. That and some crap about some other crap, I don't know I don't care.

Already explained to him that running the Matrix only makes you 'god' in a figurative sense, and only in relative comparison. Whole thing seemed to pass him by without notice so I lost interest.

Either a troll or a moron. Sickly discolouration in the font lends to the former.

Your commentary is nonsense.
Simplification:

Tradition (theistic deity definition) contains (on the horizon of scientifically observable probabilities/statistics) non-evidentproperties (ie: omniscience, omnipotence)

In contrast, the definition (as observed in the original post)  reduces traditional deity-bound properties, abound scientifically observable probabilities/statistics, such that a particular property is evident - thusly the ability to forge non-trivial intelligence, and thereafter, said intelligence shall likely exceed the net intelligence of the creator's(s') species...whilst separately theist-theorized properties [omniscience, omnipotence etc] likely shan't obtain, particularly on the horizon of aforesaid observable probabilities/statistics.)

Thusly, God is properly statistically definable, as observed amidst the original post.  (Only the theistic mind adheres to the concept of omniscient, omnipotent deities)

[ApeNotKillApe]

One needs not BELIEF in the OBSERVATION of PROBABILITIES.

You're overlooking a glaring contradiction.

[Edwardo Piet]

Just because you're shitting over the forum colorfully doesn't mean you're not shitting over the forum.

[Excited Penguin]

Jordan lay off the weed

[Edwardo Piet]

Seems more like shrooms to me.

I mean, look a the colors. He's seeing that shit.

In fact his shrooms are so powerful it's exploding out of his mind and we're seeing it ourselves

Jordan Shroom God?

[ProgrammingGodJordan]

I get it.

He's been reading what Elon Musk said about computer simulation, if you remember we thrashed this out a while back.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=elo...&FORM=VIRE

The universe simulation hypothesis (particularly relating to our universe) is the least relevant scenario mentioned. (As seen in solely ONE god-tier, #3)

Primarily, A God bound entity likely has the ability to create non-trivial intelligence  (The most complex constructs in the known universe - human level, and likely beyond)

Thereafter, on Moore's Law etc, we are likely on the horizon of creating such non-trivial intelligence.  

(NOTE: Brain based models already exceed/equal humans on non trivial cognitive tasks, ranging from language translation to disease diagnosis)

[brewer]

Am I the only one who is getting a twisted Deepak Chopra feel from this guy?

[ProgrammingGodJordan]

One needs not BELIEF in the OBSERVATION of PROBABILITIES.

You're overlooking a glaring contradiction.

Specify such a contradiction.