Prove that God doesn't exist.

[PLC1]

As far as I am concerned creationism/god is a myth, no evidence points to his existence.

except, of course, for his (her? Their?) creation.

Say we finally developed the ability to explore other planets, away from our solar system. On one, we found the fossilized remains of a flying machine, but no intelligent inhabitants.

Would we conclude that the machine was evidence that the planet had once been inhabited by beings capable of creation?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

except, of course, for his (her? Their?) creation.

Say we finally developed the ability to explore other planets, away from our solar system. On one, we found the fossilized remains of a flying machine, but no intelligent inhabitants.

Would we conclude that the machine was evidence that the planet had once been inhabited by beings capable of creation?

every argument that there must be some form of super inteligent god who created us, or how else could such complex life just form...is easy to tsdeffeat..who created such a god? All the idea of God does, in terms of how life started from nothing...is push it back more.

as for no fossil remains...it is believed that we only know a fraction of teh species that died out on earth, due to the fact that Fossil remains are actuly pretty hard to come by, and need very specific things to happen for them to be left. some we know of only due one or 2 bones...also who knows , maybe life on this other planet is not conducive to fossil records...

as far as god, I have never seen anything in science that suggested a god was needed, or exists outside as a reason to justify what we don't understand....yet. To belive in God I think you have to believe in something that is in fact not provable. It does not mean it can't exist, but you do hGave to accept that you cant run a test and prove there is a God...

 

[PLC1]

every argument that there must be some form of super inteligent god who created us, or how else could such complex life just form...is easy to tsdeffeat..who created such a god? All the idea of God does, in terms of how life started from nothing...is push it back more.

as for no fossil remains...it is believed that we only know a fraction of teh species that died out on earth, due to the fact that Fossil remains are actuly pretty hard to come by, and need very specific things to happen for them to be left. some we know of only due one or 2 bones...also who knows , maybe life on this other planet is not conducive to fossil records...

as far as god, I have never seen anything in science that suggested a god was needed, or exists outside as a reason to justify what we don't understand....yet. To belive in God I think you have to believe in something that is in fact not provable. It does not mean it can't exist, but you do hGave to accept that you cant run a test and prove there is a God...

No, there is no test, no scientific proof either way. The existence of god is in the realm of philosophy, not science.

Maybe one day science will find a way to prove or disprove the existence of god, of spirituality, of life after death, and explore the questions that have interested mankind since the beginning: Why are we here? What happens after we die?

If science could come up with a definitive proof, people wouldn't accept it anyway. After 150 years, people are still trying to deny evolution, after all.

 

[orogenicman]

It isn't for science to prove or disprove the existence of God, since science makes no claim one way or another. All science says is that "god did it" doesn't explain anything. And it says this because if "God did it" actually did explain things, then we could all pack up our bags and go home. There would be no need for experimentation, testing, verification, etc. We could just throw up our hands and say "God did it" and that would be enough. Unfortunately, it isn't enough.

 

[PLC1]

It isn't for science to prove or disprove the existence of God, since science makes no claim one way or another. All science says is that "god did it" doesn't explain anything. And it says this because if "God did it" actually did explain things, then we could all pack up our bags and go home. There would be no need for experimentation, testing, verification, etc. We could just throw up our hands and say "God did it" and that would be enough. Unfortunately, it isn't enough.

So, you wouldn't be interested in finding out how god did it, or in proving the existence or non existence of god should that become possible?

 

[Apathy]

except, of course, for his (her? Their?) creation.

Say we finally developed the ability to explore other planets, away from our solar system. On one, we found the fossilized remains of a flying machine, but no intelligent inhabitants.

Would we conclude that the machine was evidence that the planet had once been inhabited by beings capable of creation?

You are comparing apples and oranges here we know how technology comes about life is not so simple. We know that flying machines do not occur naturally. The proper comparison would be, if you found an alien life form. Can you assume a God created them? You are trying say because we build machines a creator must have built us and it is not the case.

 

[Apathy]

So, you wouldn't be interested in finding out how god did it, or in proving the existence or non existence of god should that become possible?

You are going about this the wrong way. Nothing exists unless we can prove it in fact does exist. If I were to ask you to disprove the existence of unicorns you would not be able to disprove it existence.

Its like saying "He is guilty until proven innocent.".

 

[orogenicman]

So, you wouldn't be interested in finding out how god did it, or in proving the existence or non existence of god should that become possible?

Considering the fact that nothing that science has discovered about the natural world (i.e., the one in which we live) indicates that there is an all knowing, omniscient being controlling the fate of the world, I see no point to the question. When science looks at nature, what it finds is that nature is not partial to man or any other life form. All life is a struggle for survival. That is the morality of the universe in which we find ourselves. It is a violent, frightening world.

"Faith is about taking a comforting, childlike view of a disturbing and complicated world." ~ Edward Current

 

[PLC1]

You are going about this the wrong way. Nothing exists unless we can prove it in fact does exist. If I were to ask you to disprove the existence of unicorns you would not be able to disprove it existence.

Its like saying "He is guilty until proven innocent.".

Nothing exists unless we can prove it in fact does exist? Does that mean that electricity didn't exist before Thomas Edison's time?

 

[PLC1]

Considering the fact that nothing that science has discovered about the natural world (i.e., the one in which we live) indicates that there is an all knowing, omniscient being controlling the fate of the world, I see no point to the question. When science looks at nature, what it finds is that nature is not partial to man or any other life form. All life is a struggle for survival. That is the morality of the universe in which we find ourselves. It is a violent, frightening world.

"Faith is about taking a comforting, childlike view of a disturbing and complicated world." ~ Edward Current

God doesn't have to be controlling the fate of the world. God gave us power to control the world. So far, we haven't been doing a very good job of it, but that doesn't mean that god is going to step in and take over. Man does have dominion over the other creatures of the world, so it is difficult to accept your assertion that nature is not partial to man.

Naturally, we can't control the weather, at least not yet.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

No, there is no test, no scientific proof either way. The existence of god is in the realm of philosophy, not science.

Maybe one day science will find a way to prove or disprove the existence of god, of spirituality, of life after death, and explore the questions that have interested mankind since the beginning: Why are we here? What happens after we die?

If science could come up with a definitive proof, people wouldn't accept it anyway. After 150 years, people are still trying to deny evolution, after all.

science can never prove there is no god, when you give God just magic powers...that God can't be seen, heard, felt, and does everything in ways we just don't understand....there will never be a time when saying that would not justify to some to keep believing.

The only way to "disprove God" would not even really do it, it would be basically prove everything about the nature of life somehow ( I doubt possible) without God ...and even then, someone would still believe in a God.

There is a reason God has existed in tens of thousands of forms, in different Religions, most of them die of quick, some slower, but all in time I think will die off to be replaced...as science moves, and cultures change.

Mankind has a need for a God...but there is no Need for a God for there to Be mankind.

 

[Apathy]

Nothing exists unless we can prove it in fact does exist? Does that mean that electricity didn't exist before Thomas Edison's time?

No we knew of electricity much earlier.

 

[PLC1]

No we knew of electricity much earlier.

We did?

OK, so it didn't exist until we were able to prove that it existed? Somehow, that doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Apathy]

We did?

OK, so it didn't exist until we were able to prove that it existed? Somehow, that doesn't make sense to me.

To us it didnt exist.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

We did?

OK, so it didn't exist until we were able to prove that it existed? Somehow, that doesn't make sense to me.

first I think you men Ben Franklin...
but electrity has been know for some years, the Greeks knew about it.
the name of is, comes from like 1600 something, with a Brit scientist
and they had battery's as early as 1800

http://www.wisegeek.com/who-discovered-electricity.htm

question is, say Electricity did not exist...could you prove it did not?