Prove that God doesn't exist.

[Kelly]

Let me ask you first, if you will, how old do you think I am?

 

[ArmChair General]

"In 1666 Isaac Newton proposed his theory of gravitation. This was one of the greatest intellectual feats of all time. The theory explained all the observed facts, and made predictions that were later tested and found to be correct within the accuracy of the instruments being used. As far as anyone could see, Newton's theory was ``the Truth''.

During the nineteenth century, more accurate instruments were used to test Newton's theory, these observations uncovered some slight discrepancies. Albert Einstein proposed his theories of Relativity, which explained the newly observed facts and made more predictions. Those predictions have now been tested and found to be correct within the accuracy of the instruments being used. As far as anyone can see, Einstein's theory is ``the Truth''.

So how can the Truth change? Well the answer is that it hasn't. The Universe is still the same as it ever was. When a theory is said to be ``true'' it means that it agrees with all known experimental evidence."
--This is what I'm saying about Scientific Method.

and your point?

 

[Kelly]

How old are you and where did you do your graduate work in history?

 

[ArmChair General]

Let me ask you first, if you will, how old do you think I am?

16 or 17

 

[Kelly]

"and your point?"
My point is is that I know Scientific Method well and the link you provided me reinforces my previous point about scientific laws and your spaghetti monster, just more eloquently and with beller examples than I.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

16 or 17

I'm 17, but I look like a MILF

 

[ArmChair General]

I'm 17, but I look like a MILF

I bet you do. Rooowrr!

 

[Kelly]

"16 or 17"
Really? Why?

 

[Kelly]

Sorry Cheshire for the harsh words earlier. Didn't realize your age.

 

[vyo476]

Wow. This thread went kinda crazy.

Okay, I haven't exactly been privy to everything you guys have posted here in the last few hours, but...well, okay. The only thing I have to say on the matter is that belief in a God, gods, or...ahem...flying spaghetti monsters from space is just that - belief. Some things remain unexplainable - what preceded the Bing Bang, for instance. We live in a universe of cause and effect and while we can see the effect - existence - we still don't fully understand the cause. A belief in God is just a method of comfort and the thing I don't understand is why anyone would want to take that away from them.

You can't "prove" a "belief" that requires "faith." If you could there wouldn't be a point to it.

 

[ArmChair General]

"and your point?"
My point is is that I know Scientific Method well and the link you provided me reinforces my previous point about scientific laws and your spaghetti monster, just more eloquently and with beller examples than I.

Obviously you don't know the Scientific Method if you think lack of being able to disprove the flying spaghetti monster is proof that it exists.

From the LInk:

Science is best defined as a careful, disciplined, logical search for knowledge about any and all aspects of the universe, obtained by examination of the best available evidence and always subject to correction and improvement upon discovery of better evidence. What's left is magic. And it doesn't work. -- James Randi

Where is your Evidence of Gods existence?

I hope it is immediately obvious to you, that there is nothing about nature, or the complexities of life that offers the slightest corroboration of the doctrine of Catholicism. If the beauty of nature can mean that Jesus is the son of God, then it can mean anything at all.

 

[ArmChair General]

"16 or 17"
Really? Why?

Well your first question kind of summed it up. And then your continual ignorance of the scientific method. I figured you have to be a teenager.

 

[Kelly]

"Okay, I haven't exactly been privy to everything you guys have posted here in the last few hours, but...well, okay. The only thing I have to say on the matter is that belief in a God, gods, or...ahem...flying spaghetti monsters from space is just that - belief. Some things remain unexplainable - what preceded the Bing Bang, for instance. We live in a universe of cause and effect and while we can see the effect - existence - we still don't fully understand the cause."--kind of agree

"A belief in God is just a method of comfort"--disagree

"You can't "prove" a "belief" that requires "faith." If you could there wouldn't be a point to it."--agree. I'm not trying to prove the things I have faith in to be true, only that we cannot deny our creation by something greater than us (God). I'm not excluding Evolution either.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Sorry Cheshire for the harsh words earlier. Didn't realize your age.

That's ok, my grandparents get harsh to, must be an old age thing.

 

[ArmChair General]

Wow. This thread went kinda crazy.

Okay, I haven't exactly been privy to everything you guys have posted here in the last few hours, but...well, okay. The only thing I have to say on the matter is that belief in a God, gods, or...ahem...flying spaghetti monsters from space is just that - belief. Some things remain unexplainable - what preceded the Bing Bang, for instance. We live in a universe of cause and effect and while we can see the effect - existence - we still don't fully understand the cause. A belief in God is just a method of comfort and the thing I don't understand is why anyone would want to take that away from them.

You can't "prove" a "belief" that requires "faith." If you could there wouldn't be a point to it.

What patronising condescension!

Its the same as saying, “You and I are too intelligent and well educated to need religion. But ordinary dumb people, need religion.”

In any case, the universe doesn’t owe us comfort, and the fact that a belief is comforting doesn’t make it true.