Quote from: BADecker on June 16, 2017, 08:20:36 PM

Quote from: XinXan on June 16, 2017, 05:10:46 PM

Quote from: BADecker on June 16, 2017, 04:02:47 PM

Quote from: XinXan on June 16, 2017, 03:35:49 PM

Quote from: BADecker on June 16, 2017, 03:19:23 PM

Quote from: XinXan on June 16, 2017, 11:11:07 AM

Quote from: BADecker on June 16, 2017, 08:23:41 AM

God exists. Scientists have always known this. From Apologetics Press:

Quote from: https://apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=9&article=879

Cause and EffectScientific Proof that God Exists
by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

The Universe exists and is real. Every rational person must admit this point. If it did not exist, we would not be here to talk about it. So the question arises, How did the Universe get here? Did it create itself? If it did not create itself, it must have had a cause.

Lets look at the law of cause and effect. As far as science knows, natural laws have no exceptions. This is definitely true of the law of cause and effect, which is the most universal and most certain of all laws. Simply put, the law of cause and effect states that every material effect must have an adequate cause that existed before the effect.

Material effects without adequate causes do not exist. Also, causes never occur after the effect. In addition, the effect never is greater than the cause. That is why scientists say that every material effect must have an adequate cause. The river did not turn muddy because the frog jumped in; the book did not fall off the table because the fly landed on it. These are not adequate causes. For whatever effects we see, we must present adequate causes.

Read more at https://apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=9&article=879.

Cool

The evidence is sufficient to show that this material Universe needs a non-material cause. That non-material Cause is God because... Huh

?? Yet again a stupid christian webpage claiming that God did it without not one single shred of evidence. Look I can do it too.

The evidence is the complexity. Stuff doesn't become complex without a more complex precursor. Entropy shows this. The complexity of the universe is so extremely great that the term "God" fits Whatever made the universe.

Quote from: XinXan on June 16, 2017, 11:11:07 AM

The evidence is sufficient to show that this material Universe needs a non-material cause. That non-material Cause is the (Pick any God from any religion you want)

Religions are usually misguided in their understanding of God. Choose the real God, the one that science proves through cause and effect, entropy, and complexity. Then find the religion that most correctly matches the real God. Then study that religion to find the things about God that science is too weak to find out.

Quote from: XinXan on June 16, 2017, 11:11:07 AM

If there is to be a deity that is the exception from the requirement that all existing things need a cause then the same exception can be made for the sum of all energy that exists, considering that it manifests in different forms.

That we know, only the things of the universe are cause and effect things. In fact, we can barely conceive of anything that would be outside of the universe at all. Nothing random has ever been proven. But, God, being outside of the universe (at least in part) may have randomness within Himself. We just don't know through scientific observation, because science can barely observe things in this universe, but hasn't found a way to observe anything outside of the universe.

Quote from: XinXan on June 16, 2017, 11:11:07 AM

Further, even if a person wanted to accept that there was such a being there is nothing at all in the cosmological argument to indicate that the being would have any of the properties of humans that are projected into the concept of the deity of any particular religion. The first mover or first cause is devoid of any other characteristic.

The point is that through scientific observation, we know very little about the characteristics of God. Many religions have elements of truth regarding the characteristics of God, because the religious info has been passed down or written down from the beginning. Science has a long way to go to find out as much about God as religion has found out about Him.

Science is going in the wrong direction. Used to be that science searched for truth, and only accepted it as truth when it was proven. Now science accepts as truth the unproven big bang, and an unproven 13 to 14 billion year old universe, when religion shows us that the universe is less than 6,200 years old. Science is going the wrong way, and will ultimately fail if it doesn't change.

Let's get back to real science, both in this thread, and in scientific observation. Real science proves God exists. The proof is found through combining the basic scientific facts/laws/principles of cause and effect, entropy, and complexity. These could not exist together as they do in the universe without God, Whatever He may be.

Cool

Nope, stop it. Science doesn't prove any god at all. You haven't shown a single piece of evidence pointing to a specific god. Complexity? How does complexity point to your specific god? You have to define what god means which you haven't. You always talk about the god from the bible because thats your belief, a belief based on faith, not science.

So you don't have much scientific understanding about complexity. Look above at what I said about it.

We have no evidence in the universe of complexity coming about without something more complex being its precursor.

The fact that you want me to "stop it" shows that you are irritated because you don't have an answer to the things that I am showing you. Why are you so against reality? What changes in your life if you realize God is real? You still go on living just like you always have. The only thing that you might achieve is peace if you come to be on God's side rather than against Him.

Cool

Still not defining god. Still no evidence that proves anything you say points to your specific God. I can agree with everything you said and it still doesn't show God exists. The precursor has to be more complex but it doesn't have to be God. If it is God, who is the precursor of god then? Same argument over and over again. Self refuting arguments that you keep using.

-Everything has a cause (then you would say but god doesnt have a cause but you just said everything has a cause but god doesn't have a cause....)
-Everything that is complex requires a more complex precursor (then you would say god doesn't but you just said everything does....)
Loop arguments and none of them point to a specific God. You keep avoiding the question. Where is the evidence that shows your specific God is the real God.

You are forgetting one major thing here. God isn't necessarily part of everything. Everything includes this universe. If God has made Himself partially part of this universe, God still isn't included in everything, because He is outside of this universe, as well.

This is my God, the real God, as proven by the scientific laws/principles of cause and effect, entropy, and complexity, combined.

Cool

Episode 21: 'Chaos and randomness inside the mind of a retard named...you know the name'
Ever won an argument with a decent, intelligent human being? Things change, the argument changes from his side, he thinks about it, even if he still sustains his idea, his argumentation will take new thinks into consideration. Try the same with dumb, stupid, idiotic people and it will go like this: no matter how evident your argument is, his argument will always stay the same. He can never realize the fallacy in his thinking so he will always believe he is right, never researching further. That is what is happening with our small retard, Badecker. His answers have a randomness, many times he does not answer to what you said but to what crosses his useless mind. But no matter how random his answer is, he will always keep claiming the same stupid shit, over and over again. For him, the big bang is not real. He can't really understand that the Big Bang has been scientifically observed, its traces have been seen, they completely match the theory. He does not understand that there was first a theory and a prediction of what they would find and they found exactly the same thing the theory contained (Background Radiation). He does not understand the Big Bang was not a myth (as Gods are), it was properly defined, it obeys scientific laws, it is completely understandable and it has already been reproduced, on a very small scale. He somehow surpasses all of the facts in favor of his brainwashing fairy tale. He can not understand logic and he does not realize that cause and effect can not be a definite law since some things may except from the rule (radioactive decay, the big bang itself) because a cause has not yet been found, which turns cause and effect into an imperfect rule. He does not understand complexity, neither entropy and we can tell that just by the very own fact that he calls them 'scientific laws'. He does not understand that a God could not be proven based on the fact that cause and effect, entropy and complexity exist since all of these might (and might is the right term because of the exceptions) lead to the existence of a cause of the beginning, one that is undefined and unseen at the moment. He does not understand that because of our understanding of this universe (an understanding that works, it gets things going) science never mentions God as a possible first cause since there are an infinite more probable causes than this one. He does not understand that all religions have the same 'characteristics' of the Creator, they differ on the stories an are all man made and 90% they are historically erroneous which makes it all to seem a 'forgery' from the beginning. He does not understand that the age of our universe is an approximation, a very close one, not a theory and that it is a fact because the proofs have already been made, observations were clear, research was strongly done. All that Badecker can think of is that whatever the circumstances, God exists. No matter how hard the evidence would be, he would believe the same. That is a mental illness and a huge level of stupidity. The funny thing, the one that makes us not give a flying spit on his ideas, is that he doesn't even understand that he is stupid. Stay tuned for more, the chaotic retard will most surely come back with some new package for his own shit.