What are the conflicts between atheism and science?

[IceLight020]

Perhaps you missed that my post was in response to someone saying that "Science is vivid proof of it's [God's] existence."

I fully appreciate that the concept of God sits outside science - is neither provable nor disprovable by science. That was not the point of my post.

My post didn't say "This is science - it disproves God" - it just said that I couldn't see a proof of God in the scientific method, as seemed to be claimed earlier.

But how can you disprove something that may have never existed anyway in that specific area? Remember, the scientific method has flaws as well. Every scientist knows that. (Or should.)

That is like using the scientific method to prove you do not have a cookie in your hand when it is obvious you do have it and vise versa.

Person 1: "There is no cookie in my hand." (Cookie in hand)
Critic: "Yes there is." (Obviously)
Person 1: *Puts in mouth* "No there isn't." (Yeah, NOW there isn't...)

Person 2: "There is a cookie in my hand." (Cookie in hand)
Critic 2: "No there isn't" (Isn't paying attention)
Person 2:*Puts in mouth* "Yes there is." (Wrong way to prove himself.)

Person 3: There is a cookie in my hand. (Cookie in hand)
Critic 3: "No there isn't" (In denial)
Person 3 *Puts cookie in mouth* "Now it isn't."(Obviously)

And etc.

You cannot prove or disprove faith. So how can you prove or disprove God?

 

[Emil]

I had a revelation, "God does not exist. "
Can you demonstrate otherwise?

 

[IceLight020]

I had a revelation, "God does not exist. "
Can you demonstrate otherwise?

I could prove otherwise, but why bother? Either way, I'll have fun with this.

Say you were sleeping and just woke up. You got out of bed without thinking about anything but...

I need to go to work!

See the irony in the situation? Think about it. You got up. Did you even consider your legs may have not worked that day? Nah. That is considered faith. There was no proof that your legs would work for you didn't bother searching for it. You could use the fact that your legs worked yesterday, but then again you are still basing it on faith. Why? You never know... A spider could have bitten a nerve and you may have not known it and might not be able to get up.

Thus, can we say that we can scientifically prove/disprove God?

That is like trying to prove civilization as old without any contact with another civilization (And no contact to the research on it either.)

 

[spidergoat]

That's not faith, either your legs work or they don't.

 

[IceLight020]

That's not faith, either your legs work or they don't.

Don't warp what I said.

I said you believe your legs will work through the example. They may or may not work. That is faith.

God is a belief based on faith. You cannot prove or disprove it. So why are you even bothering?

The only way to prove or disprove his existence is to die. You want to test the hypothesis?

I wouldn't recommend it.

 

[Emil]

I could prove otherwise, but why bother? Either way, I'll have fun with this....

I had a revelation, and you had a revelation, none of us can not prove scientifically that this is also a fact.

 

[IceLight020]

Yes. "He does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, he does, HE DOES!!!!!!"

Make any sense?

(the author asserts the right to not be recognised as the producer of this piece of homegrown drivel, all rights reserved and fed on a mix of hope and illogic).

I never said I believed in God. I do however state that the only way to disprove or prove him is to die. But then it will be too late now wouldn't it?

That is why it is on faith. Keep calling things illogical. You being illogical as well if you consider the fact that everyone doesn't even classify one thing as an absolute fact.

"Your wrong!"

Tell me then...

Why are there criminals then.

If there was absolute fact, we wouldn't have chaos for we would all branch from one thing. The truth. We would be born knowing the truth. You people think truth is set in stone.

Tell me, what is something that every civilization agrees on. Every civilization. If it is absolute and in stone, you can't go against it now can you?

 

[Emil]

Tell me, what is something that every civilization agrees on. Every civilization. If it is absolute and in stone, you can't go against it now can you?

Square of the hypotenuse equals the sum of the squares of the sides.
PI=3.14.....

 

[IceLight020]

Square of the hypotenuse equals the sum of the squares of the sides.
PI=3.14.....

"PI possibly first entered human consciousness in Egypt. The earliest known reference to PI (Version 1.0) occurs in a Middle Kingdom papyrus scroll (produced on a very old MAC, or a bad Apple), written around 1650 BC by a scribe named Ahmes. He began the scroll with the words, "The Entrance Into the Knowledge of All Existing Things" and remarks in passing that he composed the scroll "in likeness to writings made of old". Towards the end of the scroll, which is composed of various mathematical problems and their solutions, the area of a circle is found using a rough sort of PI. " - http://www.jimloy.com/pseudo/pyramid.htm

Apparently not in the days before "around 1650 BC" in Egypt?

 

[spidergoat]

Don't warp what I said.

I said you believe your legs will work through the example. They may or may not work. That is faith.

God is a belief based on faith. You cannot prove or disprove it. So why are you even bothering?

The only way to prove or disprove his existence is to die. You want to test the hypothesis?

I wouldn't recommend it.

But I can test theistic religions because they can be specific about the attributes and behaviors of God.

 

[IceLight020]

But I can test theistic religions because they can be specific about the attributes and behaviors of God.

Oh you can? Okay. Grab a knife. Kill yourself. Tell me if there is a God or not. Oh wait... You would be dead. My bad. *Joking*

But seriously, you feel so bold in proving faith as non-existent. Prove it then.

 

[spidergoat]

We can test prayer. We can evaluate whether believers are better people or are more moral or spend less time in jail. We can see if the creation myths align with scientific facts. We can see if the universe shows evidence of design. We can evaluate whether the universe is fine-tuned for life or if this is just an illusion. We can see if there are natural or evolutionary origins for religion. Absence of evidence is evidence of absence.

 

[IceLight020]

We can test prayer.

We can also test logic and see if it has flaws as well.

We can evaluate whether believers are better people or are more moral or spend less time in jail.

We can also test if those people were just grown in a horrible environment.

We can see if the creation myths align with scientific facts.

We can also see if faith aligns with scientific facts.

We can see if the universe shows evidence of design.

We can also test if that scientific method had a flaw.

We can evaluate whether the universe is fine-tuned for life or if this is just an illusion.

We can also evaluate whether the universe was even meant to be fine tuned for life and if people know if they are in an illusion when one is created.

We can see if there are natural or evolutionary origins for religion.

We can also see ancient history and see if there are contradictions in both.

Absence of evidence is evidence of absence.

And evidence of absence is absence of evidence. What is your point? o.o

 

[spidergoat]

We can also test logic and see if it has flaws as well.

How do we do that?

 

[IceLight020]

How do we do that?

Everything is originally from perception right?

Lets see if everyone shares the same perception.

 

[universaldistress]

I never said I believed in God. I do however state that the only way to disprove or prove him is to die. But then it will be too late now wouldn't it?

That is why it is on faith. Keep calling things illogical. You being illogical as well if you consider the fact that everyone doesn't even classify one thing as an absolute fact.

"Your wrong!"

Tell me then...

Why are there criminals then.

If there was absolute fact, we wouldn't have chaos for we would all branch from one thing. The truth. We would be born knowing the truth. You people think truth is set in stone.

Tell me, what is something that every civilization agrees on. Every civilization. If it is absolute and in stone, you can't go against it now can you?

Where did all this come from? I wasn't directing my final realisation that god exists at you. Its between me and the big-man thank you very much.

 

[IceLight020]

Where did all this come from? I wasn't directing my final realisation that god exists at you. Its between me and the big-man thank you very much.

It doesn't defeat "fact". So thus, does it really matter?

You kept going to infinity universal.

I decided to end the argument.

Both views exist. Remember that.

 

[universaldistress]

The fact my legs work is a FACT. They do. I can send you video if you like.

Is this a belief?

People's belief in god doesn't require evidence, only an old book or somesuch equivalent intake of fiction.

So one is a PROVEN fact.

The other is a BELIEF.

Anything else is just bullshit fudging.

 

[IceLight020]

The fact my legs work is a FACT. They do. I can send you video if you like.

Is this a belief?

People's belief in god doesn't require evidence, only an old book or somesuch equivalent intake of fiction.

So one is a PROVEN fact.

The other is a BELIEF.

Anything else is just bullshit fudging.

I assume you didn't read what I said. Should I define my definitions or do you understand them now?

Belief can be considered fact. Get into the moral debate. See how you can apply morals to "Absolute truth".

Not so absolute is it now?

Perception > Fact

In order to create a fact, a perception must be created.

Thus, technically fact is a perception.

Which in turn means...

How do we know who is right about what?

 

[universaldistress]

It doesn't defeat "fact". So thus, does it really matter?

You kept going to infinity universal.

I decided to end the argument.

Both views exist. Remember that.

What exactly do you think you have ended?