What evidence for God

[Commoner]

You've gotten at least two complete answers, yet you don't seem to be satisfied with any of them. Then why ask at all? If you need specific people to make your case, just name your top however-many "greats" and move on already. You're just jerking us a round with this...

EDIT: now at least three answers..

 

[tumbleweed41]

Guys...Mestemia, Commoner, Mellonhead, Tumbleweed41, RitalinO.D......

.....The first two of my three questions have been answered, should someone answer the third I will continue to put forward ‘evidence’ that would prompt any reasonable and enquiring mind to investigate further...clearly such evidence will have no import or significance to you.

Wombat, I know you want your questions answered so you can set the perimeters of accepted evidence.
However, you have made a claim. There should be no need to set the perimeters.
Simply answer and present your statistical probability-evidence that points directly to the God of Abraham.

 

[Thief]

And if not? What is to fear?


I am much more than dust.
I am Oxygen, Carbon, Hydrogen, Nitrogen, Calcium, Phosphorous, Potassium, Sulfur, Chlorine, Sodium, Magnesium, Iron, Cobalt, Copper, Zinc, Iodine, Selenium, Manganese, Molybdenum, Nickel, Fluorine, various bacteria and other microorganisms.

Are you trying to be coy?

Not expecting anything of yourself beyond your last breath?

 

[tumbleweed41]

Not expecting anything of yourself beyond your last breath?

I have no idea if there is "anything beyond my last breath".
I doubt it however.

 

[Thief]

I have no idea if there is "anything beyond my last breath".
I doubt it however.

So your banner reads....modern deist.....

God....without spiritual life?

 

[elcazador]

why is it that man can create? why can we reason with that which is not physically present? with that which does not exist?

 

[Dan4reason]

why is it that man can create? why can we reason with that which is not physically present? with that which does not exist?

We have a brain connected to a body.

 

[McBell]

Guys...Mestemia, Commoner, Mellonhead, Tumbleweed41, RitalinO.D.
The question was posed by an Agnostic Atheist in #1-
“Simple, what evidence is there of there being a god, a higher being, or any of the like?”

Since joining the discussion some 50+ posts ago I have seen, documented and put before you evidence of the most astounding array of evasion, misrepresentation, falsification, fabrication, disingenuous extrapolation and projection and semantic obfuscation from the non theist/Atheist contingent.
Even when abundant evidence and empirical proof positive is put forward as to these behaviours the entire issue and all evidence is cut and ignored or more astounding quoted and ignored. When it is pointed out (numerous times) that it is extremely unlikely you will find/see evidence of God if you cannot see/acknowledge proof positive of your own behaviour...that is ignored too or deemed “ad hom”.
Collectively you scream and argue that all ‘evidence’ must be “irrefutable objective empirical” and when provided with such on a simple matter you cannot even acknowledge its existence...let alone refute it.
For a dozen+ posts I have posed three simple straightforward questions that sought to establish reasonable and mutually agreed parameters for ‘probability’...and you either refuse to respond or make this a blood from a stone issue. No appeal to logic or reason will sway you to establish reasonable parameters/foundation for further investigation...what possible hope is there of answering the OP question in the face of such steadfast obfuscation?
The first two of my three questions have been answered, should someone answer the third I will continue to put forward ‘evidence’ that would prompt any reasonable and enquiring mind to investigate further...clearly such evidence will have no import or significance to you.
You may then continue to howl from the sidelines...indifferent, impervious and irrelevant to any subsequent discussion.

 

[McBell]

If non-existence is the actual end.....there is nothing to fear.

Are you sure that you are nothing but dust?

Doesn't really matter if there is something other than dust.
I fully, willingly and adamantly defy, deny, reject, and despise every single picture painted of god I have seen and heard.

Your god is no exception.

 

[elcazador]

We have a brain connected to a body.

Does that really explain why we can draw upon the indiscernible?

 

[Dan4reason]

Does that really explain why we can draw upon the indiscernible?

The brain does yes to a great degree. Do you need me to enlighten you about neurology?

 

[Wombat]

1. Charles Darwin. 12 February 1809 – 19 April 1882
2. Isaac Newton 4 January 1643 – 31 March 1727
3. Albert Einstein March 14, 1879- April 18, 1955
4. Gregor Mendel July 20, 1822 – January 6, 1884
5. Archimedes 287 BC – c. 212 BC
6. Thomas Edison February 11, 1847 – October 18, 1931
7. Nicholas Copernicus 19 February 1473 – 24 May 1543
8. Mendeleev 8 February 1834 – 2 February 1907)
9. Louis Pasteur December 27, 1822 – September 28, 1895

Thank you Dan4reason
These are the Science horses running in the Science race that has been ongoing throughout human history. There are pre history horses (we don’t know the name of the wheels inventor but the science lives on) and there is a vast number of failed (fallen horse) scientists whos names we don’t record, remember or celebrate.
The list you provide shows three vital/central things commonplace to any such list of greats/influential/geniuses from >any< field of human endeavour (Save those lists drawn up by those who cannot see beyond their own time frame ;-)

1/ The timeline spread is random and without pattern. While the number of great scientists clusters towards the modern era this is to be expected as science has &#8216;hit its straps&#8217; and these scientists are well known to us ( A list of great Sculptors may be concentrated in the Classical period reflecting the popularity of sculpture then). The only other thing I would point out about your excellent and revealing list is the cultural bias omissions ...nothing from the East. How much of the work of the scientist you list would not have been possible without the Algebra of Muhammad ibn M&#363;s&#257; al-Khw&#257;rizm&#299; ?
No matter...The timeline of great Scientists indicates no pattern or anomaly in chance/probability that would be cause for suspicion-

2/ The individual scientists are found spread through history as one would expect- some in isolation, some lives overlapping in time- in pairs, clusters or groups. The lives of Einstein, Mendel, and Edison overlap, they are competitive sciences horses in the same race/period.
This is reflective of &#8220;normal conditions&#8221; for any field of human endeavour...isolated race winning greats (Archimedes), overlapping pairs or a hairs breath apart in time (Copernicus/ Newton) and clusters/groups.

3/ Just as these great science horses are randomly spread through time they are from widely diverse geographical stables...from Greece, to Russia, to England to the US. No pattern, no common feature nothing that indicates anomaly in probability or would give cause for suspicion- further investigation.

 

[Wombat]

In the religion horse race there are innumerable failed/fallen horses. Despite the fact that many (unlike science horses) had State backing and vested/invested interest to ensure survival...they fell...have no followers/no influence, no standing in the world and are dead religion horses-
We don&#8217;t have the names of the jockey/founders who rode these nags...we just know they didn&#8217;t make it to the end of the track-
Resheph, Baal, Anath , Astarte ,Ashtoreth ,Hadad ,Nebo, Dagon, Melek ,Yau
Ahijah ,Amon-Re, Isis ,Osiris ,Ptah, Molech, Arianrod Nuada Argetlam
Morrigu Tagd Govannon Goibniu Gunfled Odin Dagda Ogma Ogryvan Marzin
Dea Dia Mara Iuno Lucina Diana of Ephesus Saturn Robigus Furrina Pluto
Cronos Vesta Engurra Zer-panitu Belus Merodach Ubilulu Elum
U-dimmer-an-kia Marduk U-sab-sib Nin U-Mersi Persephone Tammuz Istar
Venus Lagas Beltis Nirig Nusku En-Mersi Aa Assur Sin Beltu
Apsu Kuski-banda Elali Nin-azu Mami Qarradu Zaraqu Ueras Zagaga


There have been countless other starters in the religion race...in each period they rode (and fell) against the greatest, most popular enduring and influential religion horses-
There is the great pre historic bedrock of global animist and Native religion...and then-

Hinduism 2000 BCE .... Judaism1500-1350 BCE.... Zoroastrianism 628-527 BCE..... Buddhism 563-483 BCE....... Christianity1-33 CE.......... Islam 570-632 CE.......

......1........1..........1..........1.........1..........1.........

No clusters, no pairs, no two ever in the same time frame...No Jesus and Mohammed contending in the same period...no Krishna, Buddha and Moses with overlapping lives.....................>Why<?
In >TEN THOUSAND+ YEARS< of random man made human invention of religion >CHANCE< has never rolled a pair? Not even close to a pair? No two religious &#8216;greats&#8217; within 50-100 years of each other?
>All< other horses, even when backed by the power of the State and popular belief, fall and die...but these horses, >always and invariably< (except for the seventh runner- Baha&#8217;i;-) are isolated runners...no pairs...no clusters.

&#8220;What we do know is that this sort of thing is extremely unlikely in normal conditions. So therefore there must be abnormal conditions that are affecting all horses...&#8221; Dan4reason.

What &#8220;abnormal conditions&#8221; could be &#8220;affecting all horses&#8221; except those unique and improbable long shots that start and run in isolation/separation for all other successful starters?
What &#8220;abnormal conditions&#8221; can run against the probability of ten thousand years of chance throwing up a deuce- Jesus and Krishna in the same time frame just as it throws up pairs and clusters of great scientists in the same time frame?
And the geographical Stables? &#8220;Maybe these horses are from a specific region...&#8221; Dan4reason.
The &#8216;greats&#8217; of religion...even if you just consider them the &#8216;inventors&#8217; of the Worlds Major Living Faiths...have a look at their geographical spread- India and the Middle East. You can put your palm across the Stable they all arose from on most maps and globes.
Again, over a ten thousand year period, no &#8216;great&#8217;- no &#8216;founder&#8217; no successful religion jockey from >all of Europe<? Why the hell not? Atheists here claim &#8220;Anyone can do it&#8221;...lot&#8217;s of people have tried. Why has no successful major faith arisen and ridden on from other than such a narrow geographical region/stable?

That&#8217;s my evidence for initiating further investigation into the God proposition Dan4reason.
It&#8217;s not &#8220;irrefutable objective empirical scientific evidence&#8221; like some demand...I never said it would or could be.
But it is sufficient evidence to establish that in the realm/field of religion there is an anomaly in probability and chance that requires explanation and prompts further investigation. I propose that further evidence builds on the evidence of the historical anomaly.
Happy to discuss it further with an honest broker who is prepared to engage in The Golden Rule of Reciprocity.....to answer questions as well as ask them.
Thanks again for your open and forthright contribution.

 

[RitalinO.D.]

Guys...Mestemia, Commoner, Mellonhead, Tumbleweed41, RitalinO.D.
The question was posed by an Agnostic Atheist in #1-
&#8220;Simple, what evidence is there of there being a god, a higher being, or any of the like?&#8221;

Since joining the discussion some 50+ posts ago I have seen, documented and put before you evidence of the most astounding array of evasion, misrepresentation, falsification, fabrication, disingenuous extrapolation and projection and semantic obfuscation from the non theist/Atheist contingent.
Even when abundant evidence and empirical proof positive is put forward as to these behaviours the entire issue and all evidence is cut and ignored or more astounding quoted and ignored. When it is pointed out (numerous times) that it is extremely unlikely you will find/see evidence of God if you cannot see/acknowledge proof positive of your own behaviour...that is ignored too or deemed &#8220;ad hom&#8221;.
Collectively you scream and argue that all &#8216;evidence&#8217; must be &#8220;irrefutable objective empirical&#8221; and when provided with such on a simple matter you cannot even acknowledge its existence...let alone refute it.
For a dozen+ posts I have posed three simple straightforward questions that sought to establish reasonable and mutually agreed parameters for &#8216;probability&#8217;...and you either refuse to respond or make this a blood from a stone issue. No appeal to logic or reason will sway you to establish reasonable parameters/foundation for further investigation...what possible hope is there of answering the OP question in the face of such steadfast obfuscation?
The first two of my three questions have been answered, should someone answer the third I will continue to put forward &#8216;evidence&#8217; that would prompt any reasonable and enquiring mind to investigate further...clearly such evidence will have no import or significance to you.
You may then continue to howl from the sidelines...indifferent, impervious and irrelevant to any subsequent discussion.

Wtf...are my posts invisible? You asked for a list of 9-10 most influential musicians, and I provided that to you several pages ago. Instead of addressing it, you post this.

Now I'm starting to think you are just a troll in disguise. You complained several times people weren't giving you what you asked for, and when I do, it goes without notice.

Screw it, I give up. My time is better served banging my head against the wall.

 

[Dan4reason]

1. Charles Darwin. 12 February 1809 &#8211; 19 April 1882
2. Isaac Newton 4 January 1643 &#8211; 31 March 1727
3. Albert Einstein March 14, 1879- April 18, 1955
4. Gregor Mendel July 20, 1822 &#8211; January 6, 1884
5. Archimedes 287 BC &#8211; c. 212 BC
6. Thomas Edison February 11, 1847 &#8211; October 18, 1931
7. Nicholas Copernicus 19 February 1473 &#8211; 24 May 1543
8. Mendeleev 8 February 1834 &#8211; 2 February 1907)
9. Louis Pasteur December 27, 1822 &#8211; September 28, 1895

Thank you Dan4reason
These are the Science horses running in the Science race that has been ongoing throughout human history. There are pre history horses (we don&#8217;t know the name of the wheels inventor but the science lives on) and there is a vast number of failed (fallen horse) scientists whos names we don&#8217;t record, remember or celebrate.
The list you provide shows three vital/central things commonplace to any such list of greats/influential/geniuses from >any< field of human endeavour (Save those lists drawn up by those who cannot see beyond their own time frame ;-)

1/ The timeline spread is random and without pattern. While the number of great scientists clusters towards the modern era this is to be expected as science has &#8216;hit its straps&#8217; and these scientists are well known to us ( A list of great Sculptors may be concentrated in the Classical period reflecting the popularity of sculpture then). The only other thing I would point out about your excellent and revealing list is the cultural bias omissions ...nothing from the East. How much of the work of the scientist you list would not have been possible without the Algebra of Muhammad ibn M&#363;s&#257; al-Khw&#257;rizm&#299; ?
No matter...The timeline of great Scientists indicates no pattern or anomaly in chance/probability that would be cause for suspicion-

2/ The individual scientists are found spread through history as one would expect- some in isolation, some lives overlapping in time- in pairs, clusters or groups. The lives of Einstein, Mendel, and Edison overlap, they are competitive sciences horses in the same race/period.
This is reflective of &#8220;normal conditions&#8221; for any field of human endeavour...isolated race winning greats (Archimedes), overlapping pairs or a hairs breath apart in time (Copernicus/ Newton) and clusters/groups.

3/ Just as these great science horses are randomly spread through time they are from widely diverse geographical stables...from Greece, to Russia, to England to the US. No pattern, no common feature nothing that indicates anomaly in probability or would give cause for suspicion- further investigation.

Thanks for the reminder. The inventor of algebra should be in that list somewhere.

I do have a minor contension about these scientists' distribution. Realize that their disribution is not completely random, even though it has a lot of randomness to it. For example, the time and place you are in affects your probability of being a great scientist.

 

[Wombat]

Thanks for the reminder. The inventor of algebra should be in that list somewhere..

I believe he provided the name and made great contribution...but I'm not sure we could call him 'inventor' thereof...like much scicence and religion...there is a great deal of evolution and building...one thing on another.

I do have a minor contension about these scientists' distribution. Realize that their disribution is not completely random, even though it has a lot of randomness to it. For example, the time and place you are in affects your probability of being a great scientist.

Yes...which is why I raised the point about Sculpture...Great Sculptors would cluster in the Classical Period...but still be spread through history.

I hope your "minor contension" will not debar consideration/comment on the central points and the identified anomaly Dan4reason....

Reason and reciprocity have been pretty thin on the ground here of late

 

[Wombat]

Wtf...are my posts invisible? You asked for a list of 9-10 most influential musicians, and I provided that to you several pages ago. Instead of addressing it, you post this. .

From #912 preceding your enthusiastic and well thought out response-
“From any single realm of human endeavour- Politics, Art, Warfare, Music, Science...please pick eight or nine figures in from one field who represent ‘the Greatest’ in history. i.e The nine greatest, most popular and influential, Musicians in all history.”
Your response-
.......................
Ugh, fine. A List of ten of the most influential musicians in history (My opinion of course) in no particular order..

- Michael Jackson
- Nirvana
- Ray Charles
- Jimi Hendrix
- Bob Marley
- Madonna
- Prince
- The Beatles
- Bob Dylan
- Eric Clapton

Do with it what you will...
...................................
I took your advise and did with it “what I will”. Deemed it to be in interesting insight into your taste in music...but a begrudging belated narrow shallow limited and near useless insight into “greatest, most popular and influential, Musicians in >all history<.”
I believe another fellow has a very small violin that accompanies any complaint...even should you find one that is legitimate.

My time is better served banging my head against the wall.

[youtube]Ho1yJwvWCrw[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ho1yJwvWCrw

 

[RitalinO.D.]

From #912 preceding your enthusiastic and well thought out response-
&#8220;From any single realm of human endeavour- Politics, Art, Warfare, Music, Science...please pick eight or nine figures in from one field who represent &#8216;the Greatest&#8217; in history. i.e The nine greatest, most popular and influential, Musicians in all history.&#8221;
Your response-
.......................
Ugh, fine. A List of ten of the most influential musicians in history (My opinion of course) in no particular order..

- Michael Jackson
- Nirvana
- Ray Charles
- Jimi Hendrix
- Bob Marley
- Madonna
- Prince
- The Beatles
- Bob Dylan
- Eric Clapton

Do with it what you will...
...................................
I took your advise and did with it &#8220;what I will&#8221;. Deemed it to be in interesting insight into your taste in music...but a begrudging belated narrow shallow limited and near useless insight into &#8220;greatest, most popular and influential, Musicians in >all history<.&#8221;
I believe another fellow has a very small violin that accompanies any complaint...even should you find one that is legitimate.

[youtube]Ho1yJwvWCrw[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ho1yJwvWCrw

Interesting. You ask for something, you get it. It doesn't fit your idea of influential (I'm sure as hell curious what your list would look like), so you dismiss and insult it.

I'll remove myself from the thread before I lose my cool. Way to have an open mind.

 

[elcazador]

The brain does yes to a great degree. Do you need me to enlighten you about neurology?

Neurology does not explain how we can exist in world of both material and immaterial, internal and external; or how we are consistently in two different realms with one currently taking precedence over the other.

 

[Wombat]

Interesting. You ask for something, you get it. It doesn't fit your idea of influential , so you dismiss and insult it. .

No. it doesn't fit >any idea< of influence over "history"


Well, if any thought was given to “influence”- “all history”...then at least some attempt at influence lineage could be made beyond the exclusively contemporary.
Just one from your list reveals-
Major influences on the Beatles-
Chuck Berry
Eddie Cochran
Buddy Holly
Roy Orbison
Carl Perkins
Elvis Presley
Little Richard
And >each one< of those leads to rhythm and blues –
Louis Jordan and Wynonie Harris T-Bone" Walker , Johnny "Otis, Carl Hogan, Charlie Christian and Muddy Waters. Elmore James.
Muddy was ranked #17 in Rolling Stone magazine's list of the 100 Greatest Artists of All Time.
The point is the question was not about what music you liked the most...but getting an overview of influence over “history”.

I'll remove myself from the thread before I lose my cool. .

Ok.

Way to have an open mind.

Sorry...my closed minded idea of the history of music is that its a bit bigger than from The Beatles to Nirvana.:rainbow1: