questfortruth
Well-Known Member
by scientific community?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Atheism is not a belief.
- Thread starter questfortruth
- Start date
-
- Tags
- atheism
I don't think that the existence/non-existence of God has anything to do with Science. Actually, even if a person never meets his parents or feels the need to, he would never doubt that his life arose from the genetic contribution of a man and a woman.
But it is a problem that scientists should address, as a psychological or social issue,... Why do some of them assume that the non-existence of God is a "scientific" doctrine that they should prove?
Furthermore, it is a moral issue: real scientists are being misrepresented.
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
Formalization, Mechanization and Automation of Gödel's Proof of God's Existence
Journal reference: Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, Volume 263: ECAI 2014Related DOI: IOS Press Ebooks - Automating Gödel's Ontological Proof of God's Existence with Higher-order Automated Theorem Provers
[1308.4526] Formalization, Mechanization and Automation of Gödel's Proof of God's Existence
Evidence please
If you can't evidence this claim then you are essentially spewing verbal diarrhea
Banach-Tarski Paradox
*Banned*
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
It is a suggestion.
So just something you made up yourself out of nothing to give yourself something to say, that has no basis in reality
Verbal diarrhea then......
I thought as much
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
It is a wrong accusation.
You stated something for which there is zero evidence as a definitive fact to give yourself something to say
I see nothing wrong with that accusation, seems to me that I was spot on
Interesting.
What's next?
Do "Science" have now enough proof to accept God's existence?
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Two heart attacks for me and not one single plea to any god.
Tinker Grey
Wanderer
This whole movie is great. Here's a clip. If you don't want to watch the whole 10 minutes, the relevant bit to this thread is from 3:20 to 4:00.
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
It is well published proof. See, this is a renowned journal.
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
Your intention is to let them ban me again. Such intention is never a friendly intention.
No it isn't
I couldn't care less about you you are nothing to me I would never go out of my way to try and get you banned that is in no way worth the hassle
Besides, you add to the flavour of these forums
This place is better off with colourful characters
Banach-Tarski Paradox
*Banned*
It’s just logic.
I don’t expect God to appear in a puff of logic.
Although it might be fun to see what computers can do with Godel’s proof.
If God can appear in a puff of logic, She could just as easily disappear in another puff of logic as well.
I mean, consider the Babblefish.
It’s theological implications alone are mind boggling.
Babel Fish - The Oddest Thing In The Universe - The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy - BBC
So, when an atheist claims "God is not real", it is not belief but knowledge?
Banach-Tarski Paradox
*Banned*
Of course it’s belief.
As for knowledge, isn’t that just another word for a very strong belief?
Why clutter up the terminology unnecessarily?
[/QUOTE]
Can you give some example?
Can you give some example?
No. Not in science, at least. Consistent defiance of falseability tests is not a matter of belief.