Why does science always upstage God?

[Fake Messiah]

Science upstages God because religion makes scientific claims and

[HappySkeptic]

In Weimar the chancellor was not elected but appointed, by the president (much like in a parliamentary democracy today, but with the president having the most power, not parliament, quite similar to what we have in France today). The chancellor however was suposed to be responsible to the parliament (Reichstag) as well and to step back once he had lost a majority of support. But what if he didnt want to...and had the support of the president?

Enjoy the fun of getting appointed Chancellor by the President, and becoming a dictator.

Secret Hitler Board Game

It's actually a fun game.

[Billy Bob]

(in no particular order)
Theists tell me, why is it that everything that God has provided, created and bestowed upon us, co-incidentally always seems to have
an alternate natural, more feasible explanation?

Why cannot science objectively find just one example out of trillions, where we can say, yeah, that thing right there, it shouldn't happen like that but it does, repeatedly.
That thing goes against what is logical or possible in our universe.
Example: People go back to Fatima, pray en masse for a sundance and on queue the Sun dances! For all the world to see?

Maybe it is the work of a God? They prayed to a God and a God responded... Makes logical sense.

But if God is going to act exactly like he doesn't exist in our universe, theists, why on earth do you even assume that he does?
What compels you to go against the grain of logic and common sense and dedicate your life to a particular myth from millions of other man made myths?

We just need one tiny example for God to show us something, but even that is asking too much for a non existent God.
Funny how everything in the world seems to make more sense when you take any extra unnecessary baggage out of the picture. (Occams)

Yeah, the world is a cruel place for the most part, but how is believing in something not real going to help anything or anyone.
Have we really reduced our species to relying on false hope to get by? We must have: 80% of the world does it.

(Even at the quantum level, weird shit happens, that isn't God! Why would the creator of the universe need to hide inside of atoms while we're all outside?
That's how our universe has been for 14 billion years, we're just discovering it now (last 100 years -through knowledge and technology.)

Theists say that? That’s not something that I have ever heard from them.
It is atheists who say that.
It is part of my arguments set:
=================================
When a scientific explanation is provided and well accepted by the scientific community, eventually, the knowledge reaches the general population and nearly everyone sets aside the old religious superstitious explanation.
The reverse never happens. There isn’t a single case where a scientific explanation has been replaced by scientists or the general public with a religious superstitious explanation.
=================================

“We just need one tiny example for God to show us something, but even that is asking too much for a non existent God.
Funny how everything in the world seems to make more sense when you take any extra unnecessary baggage out of the picture. (Occams)”

==Whether you are talking about aliens or gods (or alien-gods), they are both in the same category:
Some humans have trouble explaining some aspect of nature or human culture so they insert their god or alien into it. This is called the argument from incredulity.

For example:
Example 1:
Why do humans have various languages?
According to the Bible, humans had a single language. They were building the Tower of Babel. Then the jewish god got pissed and he “confused” their languages. So, the construction stopped.
There is no mention of biological evolution or language or cultural evolution in the Bible.

It sounds like the ancient jews did not know about evolution and had a gap in their knowledge, so they inserted their god into the gap (God of the gaps).

Example 2:
How did humans build Pyramids in Egypt?
Eric Von Danicken says that they are too stupid and it is impossible. Therefore, he inserts aliens into his knowledge gap.
Eric Von Danicken has written 3 books, I think. They are all about inserting aliens here and there and claiming ancient humans were dummies.

You mentioned Occam’s razor. This is an important concept in science. We tend to go for the more mundane explanation:
1. Some humans have mathematical skill
2. Some humans are thinkers
3. Some humans are inventive
4. They have the time and energy to do hard work for their king or gods.
5. Most importantly, we remove extraordinary claims, such as gods and aliens. We replace them with mundane explanations.

"Theists tell me, why is it that everything that God has provided, created and bestowed upon us, co-incidentally always seems to have an alternate natural, more feasible explanation?"

I'm aware of the alternatives and NONE makes sense for creation happening naturally. The first law of thermodynamics (1LT) and the 2LT shut down a natural explanation. Evidence points to nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. It must be observable, repeatable, and falsifiable. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This (the 1LT and 2LT) all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the doubters resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We know these laws and have NO doubts about them.

Then after creation there are a WHOLE lot of things science never got around such as the fine-tuning of the universe so life can exist on earth, the beginning of life, the designs of life forms, the information needing to be there before life started, the synchrony needed from the start, asexual and sexual reproduction, consciousness, logic, etc.

There's science and science fiction. Those that don't believe in a supernatural power resort to ignoring what we know and say we just don't know yet, or resort to science fiction. 

So the claim, "...co-incidentally always seems to have an alternate natural, more feasible explanation?" is rather ironic.

[The Grand Nudger]

Unless you think there was literal magic involved, even god must have "created naturally".

At any rate, what Real Science™ says about the matter, is that if there was anything before, we have no way of figuring out what that may have been from this vantage point and with these instruments we have. We wouldn't even be expected to, if there were - as it was a fairly mighty fucking rearranging of stuff, if that were the case. Everywhere we look all we see is the effects of the bomb going off, not whatever hypothetical and illustrative building may have been stranding in the crater we now observe.

For some people, saying "I don't know" is a problem - for others, it's a matter of basic honesty. I don't think that, even if you accept a literal magical creation,that the next step is a whodunnit - you might be better served with a howdunnit. Especially if you want to compete with scientific explanations for any given x.

[Fake Messiah]

Then after creation there are a WHOLE lot of things science never got around such as the fine-tuning of the universe so life can exist on earth.

There is no such thing as "fine-tuning of the universe"

the beginning of life

A lot of it is known about the beginning of life, and although not entirely, it doesn't mean that it was magic. Especially since it took the universe 14 billion years to create us and that there are so many flaws in the "design".

the designs of life forms

This is completely understood by science and is called Natural Selection.

the information needed to be there before life started,

Lol, what information was needed before life started?

[Mister Agenda]

I'm aware of the alternatives and NONE makes sense for creation happening naturally. The first law of thermodynamics (1LT) and the 2LT shut down a natural explanation. Evidence points to nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. It must be observable, repeatable, and falsifiable. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This (the 1LT and 2LT) all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the doubters resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We know these laws and have NO doubts about them.

Hi Billy Bob. NONE of the alternatives for the universe existing naturally make sense to YOU. An omnipotent being doesn't have to follow the laws of thermodynamics. Usable energy was 'at its max' the moment before the initial expansion. All the matter and energy in the universe was already there. We don't know where that initial hot, dense, state came from or how long it existed before the expansion, or even if it is meaningful to refer to duration before time began. We have various hypotheses which don't contradict the available evidence or the laws of physics as we know them, but we don't currently have the technology to test any of them.

Are you familiar with the fallacy known as the Argument from Ignorance? It basically boils down to 'if you don't know the answer to something, my answer must be right!'.

[zebo-the-fat]

If a god made everything, where was he/it before he made it and who made that place?

[Pat Mustard]

"Theists tell me, why is it that everything that God has provided, created and bestowed upon us, co-incidentally always seems to have an alternate natural, more feasible explanation?"

I'm aware of the alternatives and NONE makes sense for creation happening naturally. The first law of thermodynamics (1LT) and the 2LT shut down a natural explanation. Evidence points to nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. It must be observable, repeatable, and falsifiable. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This (the 1LT and 2LT) all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the doubters resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We know these laws and have NO doubts about them.

Then after creation there are a WHOLE lot of things science never got around such as the fine-tuning of the universe so life can exist on earth, the beginning of life, the designs of life forms, the information needing to be there before life started, the synchrony needed from the start, asexual and sexual reproduction, consciousness, logic, etc.

There's science and science fiction. Those that don't believe in a supernatural power resort to ignoring what we know and say we just don't know yet, or resort to science fiction. 

So the claim, "...co-incidentally always seems to have an alternate natural, more feasible explanation?" is rather ironic.

Tell me why did you necro this thread to defecate a whole load of bullshit PRATT, likely copied from a fundagelical pastor's 1970's era samizdat pamphlets? Do you think throwing your rancid diarrhoea at us will make us like you? Are you really that addlepated you buffoon?

[Billy Bob]

Unless you think there was literal magic involved, even god must have "created naturally".

At any rate, what Real Science™ says about the matter, is that if there was anything before, we have no way of figuring out what that may have been from this vantage point and with these instruments we have.  We wouldn't even be expected to, if there were - as it was a fairly mighty fucking rearranging of stuff, if that were the case.  Everywhere we look all we see is the effects of the bomb going off, not whatever hypothetical and illustrative building may have been stranding in the crater we now observe.

For some people, saying "I don't know" is a problem - for others, it's a matter of basic honesty. I don't think that, even if you accept a literal magical creation,that the next step is a whodunnit -  you might be better served with a howdunnit.  Especially if you want to compete with scientific explanations for any given x.

How was this somehow evidence that showed what I gave is not correct....

"Unless you think there was literal magic involved, even god must have "created naturally"."

How clear must I make it to show that it had to be done supernaturally? Have the decency to read what was put by me.

"we have no way of figuring out"

Yes, we do, we go by what we know now. I CLEARLY wrote going by what we KNOW that it can't happen naturally. You want to dismiss all of that. Then pretend you can.

I also wrote..Then after creation there are a WHOLE lot of things science never got around such as the fine-tuning of the universe so life can exist on earth, the beginning of life, the designs of life forms, the information needing to be there before life started, the synchrony needed from the start, asexual and sexual reproduction, consciousness, logic, etc.

Again, you just love ignoring what we know and pretend to be so truthful with your flippant...

"For some people, saying "I don't know" is a problem - for others, it's a matter of basic honesty."

So you don't know what fine-tuning is, what life takes, the designs, information, etc. You don't even know how to explain how we got human sexual reproduction that is here and now that you actually have some 'parts' for. You pretend to be honest and use the excuse that you just don't know about such things. You don't know because you have never been honest about what we know. You can play your game with others but I see clearly what you're doing. 

The laws of nature prove beyond any doubt that creation (along with other things I listed) can't happen naturally. Naturally lost 100%, but to you it is still a winner as you ignore what the laws teach us and thus to you naturally still wins.

[Angrboda]

*bzzzz* I'm sorry, your time has expired. Thank you for playing, "Are you or are you not a religious looney?" Vanna, I believe we have some parting gifts for our contestant.