Re: Scientific proof that God exists?

There is nothing but presumtions in your links, just as the presumption a God may or may not exist. Nothing there proves the existence of a God, it only gives a religious nonsensical interpretation of science. Therefore, since some intelligent people around already explained to you why they are bullshit, I have no reason to repeat it again. As I stated before, you are not able to properly understand reason or logic. That, or you are trolling. As for the ''orders' thing, you are completely mistaken. It's a pattern that you, followers, follow. Based on that pattern, I simply predicted what you were going to say next. I am as on topic as I could be, you are the one leading and I counter what you claim. Now, besides those bullshit links, your arguments are just modern religious indoctrinating crap, the same arguments you would get from any cultist who has no proof but has to convince people it's his way. As you can see, that's not going to work with me. Not the passive-aggresive attitude, not the mystical shit, not the 'humans can't understand God's way', nothing of this type. I expect you to prove the existence of a God. Your links have been disproven. If you do have something else, please, enlighten us. If not, please, don't resume yourself to that cultist monologue that I can hear at any corner of the street.

Almost everything in your posts is presumption, especially your spelling of the word "presumptions."

Cheesy

There is nothing wrong with your believing that science doesn't prove the existence of God. In fact, faith is healthy. It's your religion. I applaud you that you have religion. But, keep searching. You just might find a truthful religion if you do. You might even find the way to Heaven.

Cool

I don't 'believe' science doesn't prove the existence of a God, it's a fact it doesn't. I don't need to put my faith in it, you can clearly see it's like that. That's what facts are. Now, notice that I say 'the existence of A god', not your God. That is because you are not the only one to claim a God, there have been and there still are many more. Your God is flawed with simply the fact that the book on which your character's story is based on declares a certain age for life on earth. Science proves that the age on earth is way much older than your shit religion believes it is. From that point of view, your God is out of the picture and it's all just a hoax started by some fishermen and their talented friend. End of story. As for the proof of a God, there is no such thing. It's not that I believe there is no such thing, it's a fact there is no proof of a God. Will there ever be proof of a deity? We can presume nothing is impossible. But we can certainly say the possibility of it is extremely low, to the edge of impossible. As for you, cultist, you're still bringing no proof, no argument, all you do is keeping the cultist lines coming my way and trying to be ironic by correcting my spelling, without noticing it was a slip and the second 'presumption' was written as it should be. No more than a braindead religious follower.

Since you can't seem to step-by-step refute the logic in my links that prove God exists, you probably are simply attempting to believe that He doesn't exist, even though you say you know it.

Now, I could be wrong about you. You might actually have some step-by-step rebuttal. Nobody requires that you show it. So, as long as you can get by without showing it, you should be given the benefit of the doubt.

Most of the rest of what you say, above, is religious talk... maybe even religious doctrine. It's a little off topic, at least until you show the factual rebuttal of the proof that God exists. The proof:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380.

Cool

BADecker's evidence in a nutshell......

Link 1
Machine like nature of the universe.
Cause and effect
Nations looking for God?
BADecker believes that all machines are ultimately the result of a god.

Link 2
Cause and effect

Link 3
Cause and effect

Link 4
Cause and effect

Cause and effect rebuttal
If cause and effect is proof of a god, then who made god? Was it god's god? And who made god's god? was it god's god's god? This is a cycle of infinity. This is no proof.
BADecker simply applies an assumption that this a god. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uC7Ttc9g1u8

Machines like nature of the universe rebuttal
BADecker believes that machines need a maker and that maker has to be a god. The reality of this is that evolution has caused the changes. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v481/n7381/full/nature10724.html

BADecker then claims that this is only theory. The reality is that science is disproving/proving all theories we (humans) have believed for years. That is the nature of science. For it to be tested by others. People like BADecker will continually use their same argument of assumptions to state there is no proof that god does not exist. The reality is that history has shown that early Vikings believed "lightning flashed whenever Thor threw his hammer". Science has proven this incorrect.

Nations looking for god rebuttal
BADecker claims that people are looking for how the universe was made. This is true. However, BADecker then claims that because the answers are still not found, the answer must be a god. WRONG.... this is not proof. This is an assumption again on BADecker's part. Science is unlocking secrets every day. Religion is being disproven daily and BADecker continues to hold on to his mindless views.