Interpretations are not proof, exact facts are. When everyone tells you that shit you keel posting is a fail, you should get a clue. But apologists don't get too many clues, don't they? As for the proof, you may not pass the burden of proof onto me or anybody else who said they do not believe a God exists. It is your burden, not ours. You claim a God exists, you come with the exact proof. But none of you will since you have no proof. Now do as I said and fuck off outta here, you Bob Dutko ass licker.
Science laws are not interpretations. If you don't like science laws, forget this topic. This topic is about science proof that God exists. However...
If you decide to examine the science laws and how they are applied, remember that God isn't explained at all. The only reason I use the masculine pronoun with Him, is, that that's the way most people understand Him. The scientific proof for Him doesn't explain if He has a gender or not. It doesn't explain any religious aspects of Him. It simply shows that He exists... whatever He may be.

No, dumb fuck, scientific laws are not interpretation. Your bullshit is an interpretation of scientific laws and it is complete fantasy. Stop coming up with hypocrite ways of persuading this discussion in your favour, it will not work. Please fuck off and try to find your own ideas instead of pasting the same links that you've learnt on Bob Dutko's bullshit cd's. Apologist.