Top scientist asks sceptics to probe existence of God
-
Originally posted by geodome:
Logics leading to another logic to another logic and so on...
Yes. It is perhaps possible with a new branch of mathematics call Cellular Automata. It has been proven that simple rules/equation system governing the individual cells in a cellular automata system produces complicated (and [b]indeed statistically random) behavior. Such behavioir is very similar to life itself. Moreover, using cellular automata, shapes of muscles, sea shells, corals, leaves can be generated mathematically from scratch. [/b] -
But his most complete argument for God appears in a new book, The Language Of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief, which addresses two radically divergent audiences: He asks scientific sceptics to investigate God with the same open-minded zeal they apply to the natural world. And he tells fellow evangelicals that opposition to evolution undermines the credibility of faith.
Tat is nothing new
From ages up till now there have always been people who wanna earn a quick buck. If his evidence is so good, he should write a technical journal and not a bookBut scientists are probably the tougher audience.
maybe because religious people take anything at face value (miracle healing tongue speaking) and science have always been under more critique in order to come up with undisputed truthAccording to Nature, the science weekly, 'many scientists disagree strongly' with Collins-style arguments and critics feel 'more talk of religion is the last thing that science needs'.
Tat is right. 1 scientist against many scientists. If the evidence is good, and tat guy manage to prove god, trust me he is gonna win the nobel prize and all the scientific prize in the world and his name will be remembered forever. Why doesn't any people manage to come out with it ?
For a lot of other replies, I can really summarise it in tis way
"I don't know tis, science is flawed, men is stupid bla bla bla"
Even if all the above is true, tat doesn't remotely show god exists It can be a pink unicorn tat create man or the purple flying spaghetti monster or the sonic the hedgehog. U can put in anything u want here. All these is NOT even an evidence tat remotely show god exists. The above is only an attack on the knowledge of science. If u think science is limited then why r u suing the computer or staying in high rise building.
The above statement and conclusion can be summarise as "Your son do not know how to do his maths problem and u say pokemon exists." -
And the funny thing is, some people have that idea that there is only ONE chance for life to exist in such a long span of time (millions of years). The story of the tornado constructing an aeroplane is one good example of people trying to smoke others who are not well-informed.
Oh... u think the chance is low ? However the chance of god existing is the same as a tornado constructing a perfect plane out. U know wat is a perfect plane ? Massless, travel faster than speed of light, can take in limitless passengers, cost nothing etc. Now tat is more difficult and more impossibleScience is truthful because it makes everything seems so logical. What is logic? Judgement of the human brains? Don't give too much credit to the human brains. Who are we to do so?
Oh... then we should not believe in logic and start believing in illogical things ? Why don't we give credit to human brains ? u mean u know and can prove the existence of some other beings tat is better ? -
Why don't we give credit to the human brains? If you can read what I post was "don't give TOO MUCH credit...." Do I mean none at all?Originally posted by stupidissmart:Oh... then we should not believe in logic and start believing in illogical things ? Why don't we give credit to human brains ? u mean u know and can prove the existence of some other beings tat is better ?
Bro, I don't know and I can't exactly prove the existence of some other beings that is better, does it necessarily mean they might not exist? Seeing is believing, isn't that a bit naive? Who said anything about not believing in logic? Believing in illogical things is only rubbish by the rule of logics.
People claimed that religions uses brainwashing methods and tactics. Just so we know, right from the moment we are able to think, we have been all along brainwashed by science and logics... -
Bro, I don't know and I can't exactly prove the existence of some other beings that is better, does it necessarily mean they might not exist? Seeing is believing, isn't that a bit naive? Who said anything about not believing in logic? Believing in illogical things is only rubbish by the rule of logics.
If u do not know other being exists, then if u claim they do exists, u r really jumping to conclusions.
People claimed that religions uses brainwashing methods and tactics. Just so we know, right from the moment we are able to think, we have been all along brainwashed by science and logics...Who are we to do so?
Maybe because we men are still the most intelligent being tat is shown to exists ?
Logic is really "reasoning". If u do not use "logics", the only other option is really "illogical". If u say logic and science are "brainwash", then wat is the method u use to know wat to do and wat to interprete ? I can't imagine wat other method is available if we can't use logic and wat will be the outcome of someone who do not use logic. IMO, without using logic, u become a moron. U eat anything u see, u walk with your head and maybe u bite your hand and think pain is a wonderful thing. Even animals use logics to survive Even if u believe in a religion, u still need logic to understand it. -
Haha.. All I'm saying is they might exist, and they might not exist. I didn't jump into any conclusions bro.. Please do not misunderstand me. I'm keeping my mind open to anything. Impossible and possible by the law of logics. I don't think I mentioned anything about living without using logic. It certain will not fit in a logical world as this. Hence, the label moron. I agree that if we believe in a religion, we still need logic to understand it. Heck, we need logic to live in this world. Duh! That is our only mentality. If I mentioned God, an image of a blurred thing/person will probably appear on everyone's mind. That's the problem. It is neither a thing nor a person. Somehow we will refer 'it' to a 'something' and that goes to show how capable our human brain is. Even space is a 'something'. And even vacuum. But God is none of all these.Originally posted by stupidissmart:If u do not know other being exists, then if u claim they do exists, u r really jumping to conclusions.
Maybe because we men are still the most intelligent being tat is shown to exists ?
Logic is really "reasoning". If u do not use "logics", the only other option is really "illogical". If u say logic and science are "brainwash", then wat is the method u use to know wat to do and wat to interprete ? I can't imagine wat other method is available if we can't use logic and wat will be the outcome of someone who do not use logic. IMO, without using logic, u become a moron. U eat anything u see, u walk with your head and maybe u bite your hand and think pain is a wonderful thing. Even animals use logics to survive Even if u believe in a religion, u still need logic to understand it.
I am skeptic about Science being an alternative to religions but I won't base my skepticism on the grounds of pro-religion. So I ask, have there been an answer to "how everything comes about"? Yes? How about "why everything comes about"? Is there an answer to this? Or haven't yet discover the answer is it? I don't know.. You pro-Science tell me.. Then I can continue.. -
opps wrong
-
which one?Originally posted by dinky1409:opps wrong -
Double post le so wrong lah... Anyway seriously, what's up with the rolling of eyes?Originally posted by hoganrock:which one? -
Impossible and possible by the law of logics. I don't think I mentioned anything about living without using logic. It certain will not fit in a logical world as this. Hence, the label moron. I agree that if we believe in a religion, we still need logic to understand it. Heck, we need logic to live in this world. Duh! That is our only mentality.
Wat other mentality do u propose ? U mean doing everythng without logic and reasoning is an alternative ?If I mentioned God, an image of a blurred thing/person will probably appear on everyone's mind. That's the problem. It is neither a thing nor a person. Somehow we will refer 'it' to a 'something' and that goes to show how capable our human brain is. Even space is a 'something'. And even vacuum. But God is none of all these.
Your point is ?I am skeptic about Science being an alternative to religions but I won't base my skepticism on the grounds of pro-religion. So I ask, have there been an answer to "how everything comes about"? Yes? How about "why everything comes about"? Is there an answer to this? Or haven't yet discover the answer is it? I don't know.. You pro-Science tell me.. Then I can continue..
Even if science cannot show how everything comes about, it still did not show god exists. These 2 r different issues altogether. If u think science is tat bad, then why do u use a computer and write your reply ? Why do u use cars, study maths, know wat s medicine etc ? All these r made by science. If u felt science is limited, then I guess u have to go back to cavemen time and hunt. Even if u have a religon, do u have the answer to how "everything come about" ? "Everything" includes the god u know -
Oh my god bro... Hahahaha.. You are funny.. Haiz...Originally posted by stupidissmart: Even if science cannot show how everything comes about, it still did not show god exists. These 2 r different issues altogether. If u think science is tat bad, then why do u use a computer and write your reply ? Why do u use cars, study maths, know wat s medicine etc ? All these r made by science. If u felt science is limited, then I guess u have to go back to cavemen time and hunt. Even if u have a religon, do u have the answer to how "everything come about" ? "Everything" includes the god u know
Science is not that bad bro. That is my stand which I have already mentioned so many times, but not in these exact words and you probably don't understand so it's ok.
Since Science cannot show how everything comes about (like you mentioned, thanks!), doesn't that makes Science limited? Think about it bro.. And yes I think Science is limited to a certain extent but why must I go back to cavemen time and hunt? Why the extreme? Haha wth...
Yea my religion have the answer to that but do you think it is that simple? 1 question 1 answer? No. You ask me what's the answer, I tell you I don't know but as I learn more about my religion and life, I'm getting closer to that answer.
You said, ""Everything" includes the god u know". That's why I said, "If I mentioned God, an image of a blurred thing/person will probably appear on everyone's mind. That's the problem. It is neither a thing nor a person. Somehow we will refer 'it' to a 'something' and that goes to show how capable our human brain is. Even space is a 'something'. And even vacuum. But God is none of all these. "
Bro, the least thing that I wanna do here is to pick up a fight with anyone including you or be disrespectful to anyone. So if I incurred some anger or provoked someone, it is not intentional and I apologize. Let's hope it can just be a healthy friendly discussion.. -
Since Science cannot show how everything comes about (like you mentioned, thanks!), doesn't that makes Science limited? Think about it bro.. And yes I think Science is limited to a certain extent but why must I go back to cavemen time and hunt? Why the extreme? Haha wth...
Lets face it. Everything is limited. There is no such thing as "perfect". U can't have a "perfect" computer or a "perfect" person or a "perfect" knowledge. Even god who is known to be unfair and merciless is not "perfect". However science has shown itself to be very accurate and precise. They can capture the truth so well that workable complex devices can be made due to the knowledge that science give to us. If u doubt about science, then u should be doubtful about these devices made possible only by science. How do we know the high rise building won't collapse ? How do we know the computer won't explode ?
After this, probably some people will start to talk about "coffee" is shown to treat bla bla bla then recent studies show it cannot do such bla bla bla. Please note the difference between claims, hypothesis and theory, laws etc. A lot of "claims" and "hypothesis" r made by scientist who want instant recognition but they r studied by other scientists who can very well rebuked the result. For theories and laws that had stand the test of decades of critisms and test. They become very accurate and unlikely to deviate from the truth. When is the last time u see a law or theory being rebuked ?Yea my religion have the answer to that but do you think it is that simple? 1 question 1 answer? No. You ask me what's the answer, I tell you I don't know but as I learn more about my religion and life, I'm getting closer to that answer.
I am glad u know tat knowledge takes time. Why don't u have tis tolerance for science to know more about the world. Science is such tat men gradually have an answer to everything.You said, ""Everything" includes the god u know". That's why I said, "If I mentioned God, an image of a blurred thing/person will probably appear on everyone's mind. That's the problem. It is neither a thing nor a person. Somehow we will refer 'it' to a 'something' and that goes to show how capable our human brain is. Even space is a 'something'. And even vacuum. But God is none of all these. "
Well, then I can easily use back your answer to explain about the big bang. Space is something, and even vacuum. However the big bang is none of all these -
LOL.Originally posted by dinky1409:we have been all along brainwashed by science and logics... -
Lets face it. Everything is limited. There is no such thing as "perfect". U can't have a "perfect" computer or a "perfect" person or a "perfect" knowledge. Even god who is known to be unfair and merciless is not "perfect". However science has shown itself to be very accurate and precise. They can capture the truth so well that workable complex devices can be made due to the knowledge that science give to us. If u doubt about science, then u should be doubtful about these devices made possible only by science. How do we know the high rise building won't collapse ? How do we know the computer won't explode ?
That is why I talked about logics bro. What you said is true and I agree bro. Science is really wonderful. Can play games, can travel and etc etc. However, to credit "existence" to Science, that is too far-fetched. You already mentioned everything is limited. A big question mark like "existence" answered by something so limited? If you are ok with that, then that's your personal opinion and I respect that. For me, it just doesn't fit.
After this, probably some people will start to talk about "coffee" is shown to treat bla bla bla then recent studies show it cannot do such bla bla bla. Please note the difference between claims, hypothesis and theory, laws etc. A lot of "claims" and "hypothesis" r made by scientist who want instant recognition but they r studied by other scientists who can very well rebuked the result. For theories and laws that had stand the test of decades of critisms and test. They become very accurate and unlikely to deviate from the truth. When is the last time u see a law or theory being rebuked ?I am glad u know tat knowledge takes time. Why don't u have tis tolerance for science to know more about the world. Science is such tat men gradually have an answer to everything.
Because I believe that when Science do actually have the answers, it actually leads to the theory of religion.Well, then I can easily use back your answer to explain about the big bang. Space is something, and even vacuum. However the big bang is none of all these
Big Bang has been mentioned in my religion. 'Nuff said. -
That is why I talked about logics bro. What you said is true and I agree bro. Science is really wonderful. Can play games, can travel and etc etc. However, to credit "existence" to Science, that is too far-fetched. You already mentioned everything is limited. A big question mark like "existence" answered by something so limited? If you are ok with that, then that's your personal opinion and I respect that. For me, it just doesn't fit.
And u propose we choose something much more limited such as religion to answer the big question mark of existence ? Furthermore science is to explore how "existence" comes about. It is not "making existence". I don't see why tis is far fetched.Because I believe that when Science do actually have the answers, it actually leads to the theory of religion
On wat basis do u come up with such a conclusion ?Big Bang has been mentioned in my religion. 'Nuff said
Then why isn't the one tat come up with the big bang a religious scholar ? Let me guess, the "mention" probably is something very very vague which can means anything. People just conveniently interprete the vague phrase to watever science has stated. -
First place, God is intangible and thus cannot be proven by physical means.
Secondly, can anyone please proof that seven demensions really do exist as predicted by the Super-String Theory?Otherwise saying, God does not exist in our reality as he does not have any physical existence but science still have a long way to go in order to evaluate other demensions. -
First place, God is intangible and thus cannot be proven by physical means.
Then the seven dimensions thingy by the super string theory watever (i don't even know wat is tat for) is intangible and thus canot be shown in our reality.
Secondly, can anyone please proof that seven demensions really do exist as predicted by the Super-String Theory?Otherwise saying, God does not exist in our reality as he does not have any physical existence but science still have a long way to go in order to evaluate other demensions Watever special treatment u used for god can be used on watever theory which is held in comtemption.
God does not exists in our reality, probably means he doesn't even exists.
Anyway, if I am not wrong, why science become a target of religion is simply because science advocates the earth is young and life faces evolution etc, which contradicts the bible. These few facts r really well substantiated by science. -
Technically, you can have a feeling of 4 of the dimensions. The first three is of course observable, the fourth is time. Time has both scalar and vector properties whereelse the other 3 are vectors. The last three unknown has not been proven as tangible yet but yet it is mathematically provable to exist. Since we can't have a proper glimpse into them, let's not be so hasty to conclude.Originally posted by stupidissmart:Then the seven dimensions thingy by the super string theory watever (i don't even know wat is tat for) is intangible and thus canot be shown in our reality. Watever special treatment u used for god can be used on watever theory which is held in comtemption.
God does not exists in our reality, probably means he doesn't even exists.
Anyway, if I am not wrong, why science become a target of religion is simply because science advocates the earth is young and life faces evolution etc, which contradicts the bible. These few facts r really well substantiated by science. -
Technically, you can have a feeling of 4 of the dimensions. The first three is of course observable, the fourth is time. Time has both scalar and vector properties whereelse the other 3 are vectors. The last three unknown has not been proven as tangible yet but yet it is mathematically provable to exist. Since we can't have a proper glimpse into them, let's not be so hasty to conclude.
yet u r hasty into concluding god is intangible and conduct no studies into it and claim it is right. Furthermore, where on earth do u get the idea tat god is intangible -
Can you see God? Can you feel God? Can you hear God? Can you smell God? Can you taste God? According to blibical defination, you can't.Originally posted by stupidissmart:yet u r hasty into concluding god is intangible and conduct no studies into it and claim it is right. Furthermore, where on earth do u get the idea tat god is intangible -
Can you see God? Can you feel God? Can you hear God? Can you smell God? Can you taste God? According to blibical defination, you can't.
If men can't, then how do moses get the 10 commandments ? How do the bible characters communicate with god ? -
Is God the ten commandments? Why don't you ask Moses how did God carve the commandments onto the two stone slabs? Can you explain esp or schizophrenia?Originally posted by stupidissmart:If men can't, then how do moses get the 10 commandments ? How do the bible characters communicate with god ? -
Is God the ten commandments? Why don't you ask Moses how did God carve the commandments onto the two stone slabs? Can you explain esp or schizophrenia?
Schizo is mental illness. ESP is mere myth. If god is intangible, then the whole story of moses able to communicate with god is already a hoax. Maybe u r right, he is just having a mental illness and he made up the whole thing about god. However according to your scripture, god did communicate with men before and tat already show he is not "intangibe" ? Do not force me to quote passages from the bible about many witnesses of god's voice booming down -
I've followed with much amusement on on the thread has deviated into yet another science vs. religion showdown. Strangely enough the topic is about unifying science and God.
Some early posters responded with sweeping rhetorics asking scientist to define life or generally debunking the work of scientist saying "oh we can't explain that blah blah...".
One particulary delusioned poster argued the the existance of God using circular logic. You know who you are.
The journey of science begun with the desire learn all about who we are, what kind of universe we live in and ultimately, why are we here. Religion and science share the same goals in this respect - to make sense of our existance.
Scientific studies started with the realization that things happen in a predictable manner when other factors are constant. Ie. the sun rises every morning regardless of the absence of sacrifices made to the sun god.
From there, man proceeded to chart the motions of planets, understand gravity, energy, electro-magnatism, atoms etc etc. But how do we know that all these arent rubbish? Like stupidissmart has pointed out, the whole system of science is self checked and regulated constantly. A theory has to be proven by repeated experiments to become a law. Only very rarely has a scientific law been revised. For example, Einsteins relavistic version of gravity differed from Newtons, even then, the Newtonian system is still very accurate and remains in use for all manners of calculations.
Some of you might have heard that mankind is on the verge of discovering the Theory of Everything. A set of laws that will explain creation, evolution and possible destruction of the known Universe. This may sound repulsive to the more religiously inclined members here. If a Theory of Everything exists, where does God fit in?
If God exsists, that means that he had a hand in the Theory. However, that also means that whatever God does in our Universe, he will be limited to within the set limits of his own rules. This is akin to the question of whether God create a boulder so heavy he can't lift it up.
Wait a second, if theres a Theory of Everything, then everything is predictable and pre-ordained? Worry not, the Universe is not deterministic, and never will be. Heisenbergs Uncertainty Principle dictates that we cannot simultaneously know the precise location and speed of a particle. That is because when we observe a particle, we have to shine light (a photon) on it, and this photon will cause a change in the speed of the particle. Thus, we will never be able to accurately predict where it goes. Perhaps God can influence the Universe through this 'loophole', pretty odd though.
It is also possible that God wrote the rules and set the initial conditions of the Universe, letting it evolve without further intervention (much more likely than the above). Of course thats assuming that the Theory of Everthing cannot explain its own existance.
A number of more fanatical religious followers might even consider it heracy for man to be questioning creation. But I put it to them that if God does not want us to be poking our noses into his work, he would have hidden it from us instead of gifting man the reasoning capacity to unlock such mysteries.
Think about it. -
its really funny how some people can bash science and logic when they dont have a clue what the fuck they are talking about, go learn some basic science then talk you ignorant retards.