God doesn't exist

theHating: It's impossible for an all-knowing, all-powerful creator to exist.
All the natural laws contradict the possibility of the existence of god.
Prove me wrong.

Angry Beaver: I simply can't

Zanjan: Prove yourself right - how natural laws contradict the possibility.

theHating: Your god doesn't exist. You provide extraordinary claims and assert their truth with zero evidence. Positive claims require positive evidence, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and extraordinary claims asserted as truth without evidence can be tossed out. Therefore if you have scientific evidence (which is testable, peer-reviewed) for ANY god, i await to hear about it patiently and excitedly.

theHating: The natural laws do not show apparent "intent" nor anything remotely "intelligent". Design can only be ascertained by accepting the process is incidental and not intentional. Therefore, creation does not require nor has a creator to account for all of existence. (Especially if you even could somehow quantify it).

theHating: Not one theist can give an example (let alone anything that could be called remotely scientific) of something that is designed and something that isnt. Not one theist can objectively distinguish between something affected by natural inherent creation versus the intended result. There is zero evidence to account for incidental events being intelligent and zero evidence to explain how incidental events result in any kind of intended design by any kind of designer.

theHating: Therefore, NO GODS OR CREATORS EXIST. Prove me wrong.

Zanjan: You've only made assertions - doing the same thing you claim theists do.

You can't prove the existence of spirit with scientific instruments because it doesn't belong to the natural world. In a lab environment, prove you have an original idea or true memory by clamping equipment to your head - all you can discover is the activity of electromagnetic waves.

You think the balance of nature is an accident. Well, that's the same as the flat earthers - the earth doesn't look round from here, can't see beyond the horizon so there must be nothing on the other side.

" i await to hear about it patiently and excitedly. "

AS if! I'm willing to agree that, in YOUR own mind, nothing like a God or creator exists. This doesn't prove my own mind is that empty.

Here is proof: I can see many things in the future others can't - science will confirm that when the future arrives. People have been doing that for eons; the details were never accidental because many things in the future were designed ages ago.

theHating: "You've only made assertions - doing the same thing you claim theists do.

You can't prove the existence of spirit with scientific instruments because it doesn't belong to the natural world."

Fallacy of false equivalency. If you can't prove it, and the only thing that does not piss off god more than saying "I dont believe", then you can logically toss it out.

"Here is proof: I can see many things in the future others can't - science will confirm that when the future arrives. People have been doing that for eons; the details were never accidental."

So you have just admitted that your god cant be proven to exist because it exists in the metaphysical/supernatural and now you somehow think science (which is a method for gaining knowledge) will confirm "things you see in the future"? Okay, how? If magic now exists and you can see science proving something that you already admit is unable to be proven, could you please explain how this proves god exists?

theHating: "In a lab environment, prove you have an original idea or true memory by clamping equipment to your head - all you can discover is the activity of electromagnetic waves."

How are you defining " original idea"? What do you assert makes an idea original?

theHating: "
AS if! I'm willing to agree that, in YOUR own mind, nothing like a God or creator exists"


Ummmm, well if someone had any scientific evidence... I would be more than happy to see it. Do you have any?

theHating: Please. We want to know if god exists. Do you have any scientific evidence for the existence of ANY god?

theHating: "This doesn't prove my own mind is that empty."

That seems like a threatening implication, but not at all what we are trying to prove. If god doesnt exist, how would that make your mind "empty"? (Non-sequitur if there are no original thoughts) your mind is empty by default.

theHating: Babies aren't born knowing god, are their minds empty?

theHating: "You think the balance of nature is an accident. Well, that's the same as the flat earthers - the earth doesn't look round from here, can't see beyond the horizon so there must be nothing on the other side."

How does nature balance itself? Is the process toward balance part of the intent of the creator? Is a single atom of carbon intended? Is a planet not emergent of incidental events? If creation had intent, wouldn't you be able to observe the essence of that in all things?

theHating: "Well, that's the same as the flat earthers - the earth doesn't look round from here, can't see beyond the horizon so there must be nothing on the other side."

Also, we can tell the earth is spherical without stepping outside of it's dimensions into space to see the bigger picture. In fact, before math and logic could be used to build space shuttles was used to demonstrate the evidence of the sphere.

Similarly, the knowledge that we obtain from within the natural sphere demonstrates that nothing in nature needs a creator for it to exist. How does god affect something like snowballs? Does he cause the ex-nihilo event and then allow the natural forces to arrive at a random final product?

Zanjan: "How are you defining " original idea"? What do you assert makes an idea original?"

In the context of ordinary human conception. Obviously, there are few fully original ideas. Supposedly, the individual has thought of something entirely on their own, barring a conflict with standard rules.

For instance, a flowerbed is not an original idea; since it's a landscape painting, there are many classic styles. Originality is in personal design, which no one else has done. Here's an example of an original garden idea:

http://floralsandstripesblog.blogspot.com/2010/12/picture-perfect-polly.html

" it exists in the metaphysical/supernatural"

There are numerous dimensions beyond the natural world; if science could explain them, it would - so far, it has only been able to detect dimensions beyond what the 5 senses physical can distinguish. They did this by showing their force and impact on the natural world. Like smoke, one intuits that somewhere nearby is active combustion.

"If magic now exists"

It exists only as an optical illusion - that is, there's someone who knows the "trick" required to create the illusion. The harvest moon is an optical illusion - the trick is to understand how atmospheric conditions cause it.

I have a "trick" I use to create the illusion that I'm a very intelligent person. The actual intelligence doesn't come from me.

Zanjan: A baby's mind is empty of knowledge - it operates by instinctive code and physical senses. It feels attraction but doesn't know love because its own needs overwhelm all other thoughts.

As it becomes aware of various things in its environment, its brain becomes "educated". However, as the baby develops into a child, then into a teenager, it will constantly attempt to test the veracity of its education. This is because the brain continues to grow until about age 21 or so.

Unfortunately, many youth are deprived of the experience of a full, and well-rounded education. They are bereft of much knowledge they could obtain so their spiritual growth becomes stunted. The only thing that can and has ever rectified this situation is a willingness to build a relationship with God. This is outside the purview of science.

theHating: http://floralsandstripesblog.blogspot.com/2010/12/picture-perfect-polly.html

Shall we clamp polly's head and see if this is an original idea or not?

"In a lab environment, prove you have an original idea or true memory by clamping equipment to your head - all you can discover is the activity of electromagnetic waves."

" There are numerous dimensions beyond the natural world; if science could explain them, it would - so far, it has only been able to detect dimensions beyond what the 5 senses physical can distinguish. They did this by showing their force and impact on the natural world. Like smoke, one intuits that somewhere nearby is active combustion.".

Indeed, and what could we infer from your existence? That your parents had sex and thus you were conceived. But you also already claimed that the metaphysical/supernatural dimension (where you assert god exists) cannot be examined with the scientific method, do you go back now and claim god to be something else? "The only thing that can and has ever rectified this situation is a willingness to build a relationship with God. (Prove god exists so we can be educated). This is outside the purview of science (then how can anyone assert knowledge that god exists?)

theHating: This is the fallacy of false equivalency.

Zanjan: God affects snowballs by preventing the maker from tucking a rock inside of it.

"what could we infer from your existence?"

Who is "we"? Seems you're suggesting there's a mob who thinks the same. No doubt, they'd infer human existence is identical; thus, they can't compute any extra reason or purpose above that.

Science has proven, through genetics, we belong to one species yet each one of us is entirely unique. We have a built-in exact identity. This can only be planned. Whereas, the odds that something will turn up the same are based on chance (accident). There are no natural clones in humans. The evidence is unquestionable - it's a direct result of a breeding program that must have its origins in the very distant past.

More recently, science has discovered mutations are never random accidents. They can't predict a precise mutation but they can often predict there will be one because they know many of the causes now. That one doesn't understand the cause doesn't imply there isn't one.

"cannot be examined with the scientific method,"

I said using "scientific instruments" in a lab. Scientific Method is quite another thing and we probably wouldn't agree on a description but I can refer you to a short course on it by a very distinguished and well-known scientist.

The Scientific Method describes how one imputes observances and places them into a formula to arrive at a theory, which can be tested. If the results don't work, something is wrong with the formula. You can't place "God" into a formula - you can place the evidence in it.

Zanjan: I didn't acquire my belief in God through education or a collection of working formulas. I intuited the existence of God from personal observation and the effect of certain responses in my life. From early childhood, there were signs and I developed a conscious connection with a rather loose, unquestioning relationship with God.

Later, I intuited God's purpose in creating man but needed to learn where I stood in time and context.

Naturally, it was a matter of delving into the need for organized religion, how that worked throughout history; that required education. Once I was up to speed, I looked for a divine Teacher, a Prophet of the highest order to help bring out my potential and instruct me on my particular place in the here and now.

Thus, I'm a guided soul....my knowledge is bestowed, not devised, invented or borrowed. That's plenty of proof.

theHating: Science has proven, through genetics, we belong to one species

You are mistaken. Also, who is this "we"???

Homo sapiens is a species, from the genus homo of the hominidea family clade belonging to the order of primates.

theHating: "There are no natural clones in humans. The evidence is unquestionable - it's a direct result of a breeding program that must have its origins in the very distant past."

Do twins or quintuplets count?