Prove that God doesn't exist.

[numinus]

Numinus: I see you are in interested in Oblate Spheroids. You must be an airplane pilot. That is the only type of person that would be interested in that. I think the information at this site will help you.
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/OblateSpheroidGeodesic.html

I am an engineer -- not a pilot. My training regarding geodesy is a tad more precise than what is required for pilots -- something to the order of a tenth of a millimeter. And differential geometry has its applications in cosmology as well. How else do you suppose they do the math on curved space?

Oh, and I don't need that particular website. I have formal training on that. You might want to give that to dawks.

Good luck with your travels. But I really don't see what this has to do with proof of anything about God.

Thank you. The relevance, if you cannot be bothered to peruse this particular *****'s posts, is to demonstrate his general ignorance on the topics he pretends to debate in.

At least you have the common sense not to impugne my knowledge in this particular subject matter.

 

[Lagboltz]

I am an engineer -- not a pilot. My training regarding geodesy is a tad more precise than what is required for pilots -- something to the order of a tenth of a millimeter. And differential geometry has its applications in cosmology as well. How else do you suppose they do the math on curved space?

Oh, and I don't need that particular website. I have formal training on that. You might want to give that to dawks.

Thank you. The relevance, if you cannot be bothered to peruse this particular *****'s posts, is to demonstrate his general ignorance on the topics he pretends to debate in.

At least you have the common sense not to impugne my knowledge in this particular subject matter.

It seems that you are very sensitive about how people view your knowledge in engineering. I understand your desire to put other people down to make you feel better about your knowledge. I often do that myself. I often use very subtle sarcasm. You might try that too.

 

[numinus]

It seems that you are very sensitive about how people view your knowledge in engineering. I understand your desire to put other people down to make you feel better about your knowledge. I often do that myself. I often use very subtle sarcasm. You might try that too.

I don't put him down to validate my credentials. I am secure with that whether anyone believes me or not.

I put him down because he is an arrogant bigot, and by extension, ignorant. Subtlety is the least effective remedy for boneheads.

 

[Lagboltz]

I put him down because he is an arrogant bigot, and by extension, ignorant. Subtlety is the least effective remedy for boneheads.

LMAO. You are right. Boneheads don't understand subtly or sarcasm at all. Only more thoughtful people understand that. I hope Dawkins sees this and knows who I'm talking about. This whole thing is hilarious and I hope people that read this understand what I'm talking about.

 

[top gun]

numinus;79748]Apparently not. Why else ask for scientific evidence to support a metaphysical truth?

There you go again with... metaphysical truth. I'm simply choosing not to jump to a magical Wizard of OZ hypothesis just because I don't know everything. That seems reasonable.

You're free to suppose anything you like. I'm just saying there is no proof of your current supposition. I've read or studied about thousand of things that at one time or another in history were to the people of the time considered as mystical as the beginning of the earth... remember, the earth used to be flat!

Study enough ancient religions and Gods and you start to see a pattern and it's called self serving.

The reason for that, if I may be so bold as to give my opinion of you, is that your question PRESUPPOSES nothing can exist outside what is scientifically verifiable. And that is precisely why I think your sort of agnosticism is nothing more than an elaborate sham.

I don't think that's what it is at all. While I do think in the end there is an extremely high likelihood there is a scientific explanation that we have just yet to discover. I'm also saying I'll gladly go along with the magical being idea. I just need to see some real evidence... or better yet actually see magical being.

You're in a tough spot once you cling to a faith based argument. It's by it's very nature disallows you to be open to anything else. I am not so inclined. I'm open, interested and still searching.

Correction -- YOU are no closer to proof. For the rest of us reasonable individuals, the existence of god is inescapable.

There is no proof my friend either way, that's appears to be the whole point.

Exactly.
Except the three monotheistic religion, all major religions of the world today started independent from one another.

Exactly.
He laid out the entire universe for your perusal. He gave you the ability to discern cause and effect. There is no doubt as to the extent of the creator's self-revelation, even to someone with only a rudimentary understanding of logic.

Exactly.
Knowing the imperfection of the human condition, he gave you the ability to rise above it.

Spare us with what you pretend to know. You don't know jack$hit.

I know all through history when people didn't understand something they said... Oh God did it. And I also know those things repeatedly were later proven scientifically.

And while I may not know jack$hit I also don't feel any need to make up his brother Holy$hit.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

It proves the first cause which we call god.

Clear?

If you just called the first cause "God" then there would be no problem, but it's all the other nonsense about this first cause that I object to--you know, the parts about slavery, selling children, killing gays, killing adulterers... all the religious accretion that you attached to the first cause with NO proof, in fact not even any evidence.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

It may not be that we have proved one side or the other. Then again maybe we have but we don't recognize it.

When Einstein recognized that the results of the Hubble telescope forced an acceptance of a created universe after much resistance he said:

I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know his thoughts. The rest are details. (The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Princeton University Press, 2000 p.202)

A later reflection was:

"Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe - a spirit vastly superior to that of man..."

More food for thought on causality:

(an early quote) Scientific research is based on the idea that everything that takes place is determined by laws of nature, and therefore this holds for the action of people. For this reason, a research scientist will hardly be inclined to believe that events could be influenced by a prayer, i.e. by a wish addressed to a Supernatural Being.
(Albert Einstein, 1936, The Human Side. Responding to a child who wrote and asked if scientists pray.)

and a later quote

"[]mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science. [He was speaking of Quantum Mechanics and the breaking down of determinism.] My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality.[]"

We should all note that Einstein was not an expert on God but on physics. I present these as interesting in how they show what a pursuit of physics leads to. Clearly Einstein did not actively believe in the God of Christianity. But he was moving in that direction and who knows what the results would have been if he had lived longer.

The question for you, Mare, is given more time will you move one way or the other? And which will be the mistake? I doubt any of us can predict what our future thoughts will be without being prideful.

I'm not sure what you were aiming at with this, but I think there is a Creative Force in the Universe (or around it, or whatever) but, like Thoma Paine, I don't buy the Christian god slaughtering his children and all the nonsense in the Bible. The teachings of Jesus are pretty good, but I don't see many people practicing them. I will move as the spirit moves me, what more can I say. I object more than you may know to the violence and cruelty being visited on people in the name of Jesus and as long as people are killed, beaten, raped, robbed of their rights by the churches, I will oppose them.

Don't confuse religion with spirituality.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Perhaps not with those exact words but no one can deny that you do disparage Christianity and make fun of it by comparing it to fairy tales in one way or another.

It would also be true that Numinus does not hold back his hostility toward the ignorant or those who are sexually different.

Not being innocent myself I suppose it is a good thing that three wrongs don't make a right. Whereas three repentant sinners do.

I don't care much what other people believe, but when those beliefs are put into action hurting others I will do my best to discredit those beliefs. Call it anything you want, but there is not single shred of evidence that the Creator of the Universe demands the deaths of gay and transpeople.

I have religious beliefs that are never stuffed down the throats of others, it's between me and my Maker. I will not vote to take away from others the rights I claim for my own.

In order for evil to triumph it is necessary only that good people do nothing.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Probably for the same reasons that anyone insults anyone else.

I doubt it is any more justifiable to insult a person because they first insulted you than it is to insult someone because they type so much ignorance (Dawkins) or became a female (ykw), or were mean in just about any way.

Should I insult a developmentally disabled (DD) person because they are ignorant? Why should it make a difference if the person is just enough smarter so that they are no longer DD but still speak ignorance whenever possible?

Should I turn the other cheek when they insult me but then insult back when the insults have reached a certain level of meanness? Even if the meanness crosses a line and becomes dangerously violent I might defend myself but there is still no need to insult.

Same with just about any other quality I can think of. Somewhere out there there might be a place for insults of some sort but it is probably not my place to decide where and to whom they are appropriate. If I thought the insult were the only means to wake someone from a slumber and intended it for their own good, then perhaps? But I don't see that happening much around here.

If no one speaks against the Nums of the world, then they will prevail. My verbal sparring with ol' Nums is aimed at anyone else who might be listening or reading. Nums is a lost cause, he may well be reincarnated as a gay or transperson (if you live by the sword so shall you die by the sword).

Part of my problem with the practice of Christianity is that there are many good people who aren't bigoted and hateful like those who persecute us in Jesus' name, but most of those good Christians are silent, allowing their religion to be hijacked in the same way that Islam is being hijacked by the haters and hurters. When will the "good" Christians rein in the hate being done by their religion?

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Um, lack of evidence is never evidence. the most one can say based on lack of evidence is that something is not proven. One can't say that it is proven wrong. if you meant "not proven" when you said refuted then you are right. If you meant "proven" wrong then you are wrong.

Epistemological arguments aside, when one takes rights from others that one claims for their own and does so with neither evidence nor proof of reason, that is unacceptable.

Why is it that you are here debating semantics while Nums does his best to spit on the teachings of Jesus? Why do Christians accept that kind of behavior in silence? Like it or not, the Nums of the world are the spokespeople for your religion, the Ted Haggards, the James Dobson, the Anita Bryants, and the Fred Phelps clones are continuing to debase your religion every single day.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

We all know the extent of your (mis)understanding of evolution. What I am not certain is your understanding of geodesics?

Do you know why a geodesic on an oblate spheroid appears like an s-curve when projected on a plane?

And if it is at all possible to cut and paste the standard mathematical symbols here, so much the better.

Everyone has specialized knowledge, it doesn't make you better than anyone else.

 

[Dr.Who]

I don't care much what other people believe, but when those beliefs are put into action hurting others I will do my best to discredit those beliefs. Call it anything you want, but there is not single shred of evidence that the Creator of the Universe demands the deaths of gay and transpeople.

It does make sense that there would not be proof that God demands the death of gay or transgender people since He does not demand that.

I have religious beliefs that are never stuffed down the throats of others, it's between me and my Maker. I will not vote to take away from others the rights I claim for my own.

Yes you do have religious beliefs. But it is obvious that you propose your version of things with far more hostility than the Christians on this board. So should I begin to lump all TG's together and ascribe to all of them what I see in you? Certainly not.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Yes you do have religious beliefs. But it is obvious that you propose your version of things with far more hostility than the Christians on this board. So should I begin to lump all TG's together and ascribe to all of them what I see in you? Certainly not.

If you can't give me a couple of examples of my hostile religious beliefs then you have no argument. I am hostile to the persecution of people on religious grounds. I don't think I have made any hostile religious posts pushing my beliefs at the expense of others, nor do any of my beliefs allow me to take rights for my own that I deny to others for religious reasons alone.

 

[Dr.Who]

If no one speaks against the Nums of the world, then they will prevail. My verbal sparring with ol' Nums is aimed at anyone else who might be listening or reading. Nums is a lost cause, he may well be reincarnated as a gay or transperson (if you live by the sword so shall you die by the sword).

Part of my problem with the practice of Christianity is that there are many good people who aren't bigoted and hateful like those who persecute us in Jesus' name, but most of those good Christians are silent, allowing their religion to be hijacked in the same way that Islam is being hijacked by the haters and hurters. When will the "good" Christians rein in the hate being done by their religion?

I share your frustration and it is good to see that you are finally acknowledging that there might be a tad more than one or two good Christians among the millions out there.

I rub shoulders with Christians at Church regularly and I find that many of them are pretty much like everyone else (though there are a significant number who really surprise one with just how committed they are to genuine good works). My main fault would be that too many of them fail to rise above, as they are called to, rather than that they are any more bigoted than anyone else.

And every single week the pastor challenges the congregation to be better people in many different ways. So do the pastors around the country have any impact?

Here is an exerpt from an article:

"Atheists and agnostics were found to be largely more disengaged in many areas of life than believers. They are less likely to be registered to vote (78 percent) than active-faith Americans (89 percent); to volunteer to help a non-church-related non-profit (20 percent vs. 30 percent); to describe themselves as "active in the community" (41 percent vs. 68 percent); and to personally help or serve a homeless or poor person (41 percent vs. 61 percent).

Additionally, when the no-faith group does donate to charitable causes, their donation amount pales in comparison to those active in faith. In 2006, atheists and agnostics donated just $200 while believers contributed $1,500. The amount is still two times higher among believers when subtracting church-based giving.

The no-faith group is also more likely to be focused on living a comfortable, balanced lifestyle (12 percent) while only 4 percent of Christians say the same. And no-faith adults are also more focused on acquiring wealth (10 percent) than believers (2 percent). One-quarter of Christians identified their faith as the primary focus of their life.

Still, one-quarter of atheists and agnostics said "deeply spiritual" accurately describes them and three-quarters of them said they are clear about the meaning and purpose of their life.

When it came to being "at peace," however, researchers saw a significant gap with 67 percent of no-faith adults saying they felt "at peace" compared to 90 percent of believers. Atheists and agnostics are also less likely to say they are convinced they are right about things in life (38 percent vs. 55 percent) and more likely to feel stressed out (37 percent vs. 26 percent)."​

http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2007/06/poll-atheists-and-agnostics-are-less.html

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

I share your frustration and it is good to see that you are finally acknowledging that there might be a tad more than one or two good Christians among the millions out there.

I rub shoulders with Christians at Church regularly and I find that many of them are pretty much like everyone else (though there are a significant number who really surprise one with just how committed they are to genuine good works). My main fault would be that too many of them fail to rise above, as they are called to, rather than that they are any more bigoted than anyone else.

And every single week the pastor challenges the congregation to be better people in many different ways. So do the pastors around the country have any impact?

Here is an exerpt from an article:

"Atheists and agnostics were found to be largely more disengaged in many areas of life than believers. They are less likely to be registered to vote (78 percent) than active-faith Americans (89 percent); to volunteer to help a non-church-related non-profit (20 percent vs. 30 percent); to describe themselves as "active in the community" (41 percent vs. 68 percent); and to personally help or serve a homeless or poor person (41 percent vs. 61 percent).

Additionally, when the no-faith group does donate to charitable causes, their donation amount pales in comparison to those active in faith. In 2006, atheists and agnostics donated just $200 while believers contributed $1,500. The amount is still two times higher among believers when subtracting church-based giving.

The no-faith group is also more likely to be focused on living a comfortable, balanced lifestyle (12 percent) while only 4 percent of Christians say the same. And no-faith adults are also more focused on acquiring wealth (10 percent) than believers (2 percent). One-quarter of Christians identified their faith as the primary focus of their life.

Still, one-quarter of atheists and agnostics said "deeply spiritual" accurately describes them and three-quarters of them said they are clear about the meaning and purpose of their life.

When it came to being "at peace," however, researchers saw a significant gap with 67 percent of no-faith adults saying they felt "at peace" compared to 90 percent of believers. Atheists and agnostics are also less likely to say they are convinced they are right about things in life (38 percent vs. 55 percent) and more likely to feel stressed out (37 percent vs. 26 percent)."​

http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2007/06/poll-atheists-and-agnostics-are-less.html

What you fail to mention is that the "no-faith" group is very, very small. Only two percent of the American population list themselves as atheists. There are less atheists than gay people.

I have never said that all Christians are bad, I have posted many times about the few that I have known who were good people. On the other hand, the vast majority helped pass anti-gay amendments into State Constitutions in what, 23 States? That's a lot of people voting the Christian line. It ain't the 2% of atheists. If you think most people are good, engaged, compassionate folks, why don't they do something about the trend of Christianity away from all the good things that Jesus taught, while marching proudly back into the 14th century. I'm having the same discussion with Andy (on the Annie "bones" thread), why are the 6 scriptures that supposedly talk about homosexuality the only ones discussed and the nearly 2000 about caring for the poor and misfortunate don't get any air-time at all? I was raised in the Christian religion, but I quit when I was a teenager because I could read and think, and I could see that what was said in Church wasn't practiced or even advocated outside the Church. There's little Christ in Christ-ianity anymore.