Science can prove a god must exist

[Zaki Aminu]

You atheists don't believe ANYTHING is real, do you? Hahahahahahahahaha!

Of course we do, just nothing really stupid like religion.

So mention ONE THING you believe is real. I mean, if you don't even believe YOU yourself are real what can be real to you - since what you can observe or know can only be real if YOU yourself are real?

[Ace Otana]

So mention ONE THING you believe is real. I mean, if you don't even believe YOU yourself are real what can be real to you - since what you can observe or know can only be real if YOU yourself are real?

Another claim. Ok, please point out where I claimed that I didn't believe in myself. Please, quote me. I wanna see you try.
You're putting words in my mouth and I want you to start backing your shit up!

[The Grand Nudger]

It should be pretty obvious at this point that his pastor fed him some garbage about atheists being solipsists, (obviously not believing in god means solipsism by default), and he's here repeating it like it were the gospel.

[Zaki Aminu]

So mention ONE THING you believe is real. I mean, if you don't even believe YOU yourself are real what can be real to you - since what you can observe or know can only be real if YOU yourself are real?

Another claim. Ok, please point out where I claimed that I didn't believe in myself. Please, quote me. I wanna see you try.
You're putting words in my mouth and I want you to start backing your shit up!

Fascinating! I don't see you mentioning even ONE THING that you believe REALLY exists. Now why would that be? Hahahahahahahahahahahah!

[Ace Otana]

Fascinating! I don't see you mentioning even ONE THING that you believe REALLY exists. Now I why would that be? Hahahahahahahahahahahah!

Principles and ideals. Now please show the quote where I said I don't believe myself to be real! Back up your claims!

---

Goodbye Troll! Don't ever come back.

Thanks to the mod who threw the bugger out, most appreciated.

[mastertrell]

Wow what an interesting discussion that has preceded my post here. I never thought it would garner so much debate . One common thread I saw though is that some of you are saying science isn’t the pursuit of god and also talk of some ultimate reality which gave me a chuckle. Science when most pure is the study of our universe through certain branches such as chemistry, biology, quantum physics, ect., using techniques of unbiased observation and understanding how and why something works. If science found in a repeatable way an interaction with “god” then science would define god, but in the same way if no evidence comes it’s way it will ignore “god”. So I wouldn’t say science is the pursuit or not, it’s just a logical way of examining the measurable aspects of the universe, and quite important to master if one wants to truly explore the universe. This ultimate reality also is funny because I have noticed that certain laws apply in the universe relative to size, such as Newtonian at the level we are at, then at the atomic level we have quantum physics and high energy physics, then eventually you get to plank length with laws that describe nature on the smallest scale like m-theory. So ultimate reality is actually relative reality, just depends where your consciousness resides 

Anyways, I saw a GREAT post by Welsh Cake and I truly mean that very insightful and I wish to offer some of my counter points.

It's called the Big Bang event. We still don't yet know what preceded it. When you try to go back and build a cosmogonical theory or model you hit the brick wall that is the Planck epoch. Everything now becomes speculation. Physics no longer makes sense

I offer two tidbits to chew over, first is that it is not all speculation, there is indeed evidence that points to a cyclical universe. There is a great TV program called Through the Worm Hole which summarizes that many physicist in order to explain the scattering of galaxies and some constants are thinking the universe might be cyclical. I have a web link to the cosmic rings that were formed.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/...nce-space/
As a side note, in a way this leads more evidence that if the universe was cyclical in nature that left over imprints are not recycled and there is still entropy buildup albeit it very small and the universe couldn’t exist in an infinite band collapse state.

The Second point is that saying physics makes no sense only strengthens my initial argument of logic vs illogical condition. Are you saying that no laws of physics were followed pre big bang? Does that mean purple elephants could shoot fireballs at Skeletor and I could hold 3 glass marbles in my hand but could throw 5 of them when I only have 3. Could consciousness be contained in nothing and create at will anything, thus magic is real? Well if so then the argument of god existing will have weight behind it. No I do not think you imply these things because that is illogical, not to have 1 to 1 correlations on physical objects, it is illogical to have nothing be composed of something. It just means the laws are logical but different, that they follow some sort of ordered sense. But my whole point was that if this is true something illogical was needed to prime mass/energy out of nothing as logic dictates this is impossible.

Also my original post only offered the cyclical universe because that is a possible path when simulating the starting point of the universe and my reasoning would have to cover it to be complete. The big bang could very well be the one and only explosion that happened.

By its own definition it would have to be an entity, not a process, otherwise why call it "God" in the first place?

I was using God as a place name holder, I usually refer to god as giver of domain, you can refer to it as a process or entity, it just easier to type god then event or uncaused cause, because most people think of god as creation of some type

What do you mean by 'outside' the realm of logic? The imaginary?

As before, I stated there can be different laws, laws of logic, laws of magic or imaginary. We need logical laws in order to measure and this universe is based on them. My argument just stated that there can be only two states before the universe was created. A “place” of logic and ordered process and concrete definition of properties or a “place” of imagination or magic, whatever you want to call it where if honestly if that is the case, god being real has a very high chance of being real. I just tried to reason from these two states and build them into the known simulation of the universe, that’s all.

Yeah, Georges Lemaître said many things. A "void" or "nothingness" hasn't been demonstrated to be true.

The quote I used for Georges Lemaître are both correct and not correct, so I can give you this point. Fact is Georges did say nothing existed before the big bang, that you can look up. I however defined what a complete void of nothingness is and I switch out his word nothing existed to void just as a clarifier. If he did try it infer some slight meaning by using a choice phrase then perhaps I did muddle some of his intent but I didn’t think so.

Then you should know from experience how this works: if you want to talk about the Universe we're all ears. If you make a bald-faced assertion there's a God-like entity out there, provide evidence and data supported by logic and reasoning to back up the claim or expect ridicule.

Well I didn’t know I needed Rogaine for my assertions, will wear a wig next time I type  But honestly all kidding aside, I offered physical law to support my flow of logic, and in my presentation I did not make a logical error and I did offer sources for some of my material. So I do think I honestly have present a sound argument and I have reposted retorts to all questions in a similar sound manor. Now I do admit I didn’t fully explain out each theory I mentioned as I assume a basic level of physics knowledge but I wanted to keep my giant posts below cloud level but my theory at it’s heart is actually simple.

I see the universe as both amazingly complex and also extremely simplistic. For example if your engineering anything you have to know the math, calculate power and resistances, diagram complex flow charts to make truly high tech constructs. That can be hard and daunting challenge to understand such knowledge to do useful endeavors. However, the simple side is sometimes harder to see, think about your dna, all the mitosis that cells divide, the chemical factory that is your body and the UNMATCHED sophistication of the human brain in biological circuitry, yet everyday all those complexities come together and fit some perfectly without effort for you to live, it’s so simple yet complex. Even look at a ball falling to earth, all the calculation you could do from velocity to wind shear to predictions yet you grab a ball throw it up and it comes down, so simple. So even a simple logical thought can have big meaning and be true without having to understand all the complex interactions under it. That’s why I kept my logical reasoning at a high level, easy to follow and think about. Anyways thank you for the reply, I will always keep my posts respectful as I appreciate the reciprocal.

[technophobe]

If science can prove that some kind of god exists, will someone please terminate the asshole?

It's been a piss-poor god, if you ask me.

Sheesh.

[mastertrell]

some sort of act of supernatural effect CAUSED matter to come into existence at some point

The correct answer to the question (where did it all come from) is - 'I don't know'.

All that wall of text amounts to nothing. No value or explanatory power.

lol that reminds me of a philosopher I knew, he once said the great thing about philosophy is that you look at things in a logical manor and you state the obvious. It’s like a magic trick where the magician saws someone in half, someone asks how did he do it and the philosopher says well don’t worry it’s just a trick, you see the magician didn’t actually cut her in half. So the philosopher can tell what’s going on without actually know HOW it’s going on.

All I said is that something outside the laws of logic would be needed to create the universe we live in, and the wall of text was the supporting flow behind it using logical simulation. So yes anything more and I mean ANYTHING more then the who what when where and why of it, you need actual observable measurements or else we won’t know anything more then it’s was some illogical spark, other then that yup I don’t know…(for now)

[Ace Otana]

lol that reminds me of a philosopher I knew, he once said the great thing about philosophy is that you look at things in a logical manor and you state the obvious. It’s like a magic trick where the magician saws someone in half, someone asks how did he do it and the philosopher says well don’t worry it’s just a trick, you see the magician didn’t actually cut her in half. So the philosopher can tell what’s going on without actually know HOW it’s going on.

All I said is that something outside the laws of logic would be needed to create the universe we live in, and the wall of text was the supporting flow behind it using logical simulation. So yes anything more and I mean ANYTHING more then the who what when where and why of it, you need actual observable measurements or else we won’t know anything more then it’s was some illogical spark, other then that yup I don’t know…(for now)

As I see it, we are all on the same boat, we all don't know. Some of us like to assume that a god did it, some others something else and there are some who simply state "I don't know". I'm in the later. Where did all this come from? I can't say. It could be something we've never thought of before, something so mind blowing that it really is beyond us. Or it could be something really really basic and simple and right under our noses. I'm not going to assume anything, I don't know. I'll wonder, I'll remain curious but I shall never pretend to know the answer. I'll state the obvious and keep to it, and wait for some kind of break through and the evidence that will allow us to look into it and actually find out what caused all this.
The idea that the universe is in some kind of endless cycle is an interesting idea. I won't assume anything, but will keep a very open mind to the idea.

[mastertrell]

believe it or not I am in the same boat with you, the reason I wrote this post, is not from the point of those major religious guys saying I know this and that and all is predained by my book, I am not one of those I am much misunderstood shaman. I am so fascinated by mysteries that I can help but try and solve or work on them. I was a software programmer for a while and in developing algorithms and laying out data flow it gave me some useful insights into this question. I noticed most people go with the black swan style of thought the unknown unknowns that can effect outcome. I absolutely agree with that, in this universe because it is very logically driven, but in this one case before everything came into being, i like to think any unknowns that i don't know about could either be defined as logical and acting in a define way or something completely off the wall with let's say illogical or better defined magical properties. Whatever came about would have to be one or the other because they are mutually exclusive your either following innate laws or your not, but if somehow it was a mix in an unknown way, it would still have that part that is mysterious and defies reasoning.

I just don't know anything beyond the first step of reasoning out something weird, VERY weird that does not seem to take place in our current state of the universe happened in order to get all this going.
I don't know if science will ever be able to look past the big bang event, but who knows I hope they do!