Your best argument that G-d does not exist

[viole]

Scientists say dark matter exists indirectly
So how can someone deny god directly????

To be honest, I am slightly skeptical of dark things, in general. They are too much reminiscent of the old ether theory. But I am not a professional physicist (although I know a bit about the subject), so there might be good reasons to accept it, I simply do not see. Being dark, probably, lol.

Atheism is completely irrational because they overlook causality
If they can't accept causality then there is nothing in its place
We can't talk to someone that hasn't accepted causality.

Be careful. There are very rational reasons to reject the asymmetry cause/effect, even if they are ultimately wrong. If you want, I can show you how it works. But in order to do that, I need to know your level of knowledge about fundamental physics and thermodynamics. I need that in order to adapt to the following up discussion.

At least agnosticism is better than atheism

Agnosticism is for sissies. Kidding of course, lol.

Ciao

- viole

 

[interminable]

A few random thoughts:

• How about give proofs and evidence that Sasquatch doesn't exist .... The only evidence that substantiates that Sasquatch doesn't exist is based on lack of evidence that Sasquatch exists.
• The one who makes the positive claim is the one who bears the burden of proof. Thus, for one to say "such and such doesn't exist" has made a negative claim. The fact that this is a negative claim does not bind that individual to the burden of proof. The one who says, "such and such DOES exist" now has made a positive claim and the burden of proof rests on them.
• From a purely logical standpoint, most atheists would hold: "There is no evidence for God; thus it is irrational to believe that God exists". Such atheists stand on solid ground of logic and reason. The remaining atheists, like myself, who will claim, "God does not exist" are stating a belief just as much as the one who says "God exists".
• One can not disprove the disprovable any more than on can not prove the provable.
• Sometimes, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence (i.e. the Platypus, believed to be mythical until its discovery in 1798).

My reasons for believing that God does not exist include the following:

• There is no evidence to substantiate that such a being exists. Those who claim otherwise do not understand "evidence".
• I find it irrational that a being who is supposedly omnipresent can not be detected anywhere; nor its effects being repeatedly, predictably observable makes it horrendously unlikely that such a being exists.
• The Epicurus argument against God, I believe to b among the best: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is ot omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able, and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God."
• There appears no need for God. As we progress in scientific knowledge, we continue to find that what was once believed to be supernatural or divine in nature has repeatedly been shown to be natural in origin; ranging from earthquakes to disease to the diversity of life.
  
• Much of what has been attributed to God (miraculous healing, resurrections, etc) have routinely and consistently been debunked. In short, most "miracles" presented by a number of theistic faiths have been shown to be fraudulent, or evidence that they even occurred have failed to meet the burdens of proof and evidence that they ever did exist: Global floods and Shangri Lah among them.
• Most often, absence of evidence is indeed evidence of absence (Sasquatch, Santa Clause and God).

If we aren't able to find evidence of existence of something does it mean that we should deny it's existence????????
?????
At least say we don't know whether it exists or not

All the creatures and universes are signs and portent of the existence of something that is intelligent

Which evidence better that your body??

Don't u see its orderliness and it's function???
I'm sure u don't believe in causality otherwise u can't say such things

Look
God has given us the ability to choose bad and good
When someone kills someone u can say god killed him but indirectly
The same is true when u save a life

In these two examples both of them u can say god has done that but indirectly

Why indirectly?
Because without his power Noone can do anything whether bad or good
This is because our existence and our motions are powered by God we have nothing from ourselves
We are completely dependent

As a beliver I say
All the problems and difficulties such as wars , diseases , strikes and ...are created just to test us even god tests us with his bounty

Without evil and good how can god test the belivers and unbelievers
Reward belongs to belivers because of that


Besides as our existence is dependent we always need god
Simply because he is our cause and we can't live even a second if he doesn't want

Unfortunately western countries train children from the beginning that science is physics and chemistry

So u can't accept something that isn't visible
But we are trained from the beginning that logic is true science and Noone can reject logic

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

We currently have no idea of what caused the big bang, or even if there was a cause ( since cause and effect are a feature of space-time ).

That's the same as saying that spacetime is a cause and effect of spacetime. We know the universe started, but not how, much less why.

You seem to be filling this great gap in our knowledge with an ill-defined notion of "God". But why would you do that? Why not just say "I have no idea?"

If I can narrow down the possibilities to two, isn't that better than doing nothing in defense of atheism.

Scientists say dark matter exists indirectly
So how can someone deny god directly????

We can't, directly or indirectly. We can only say there's no evidence for God.

Atheism is completely irrational because they overlook causality
If they can't accept causality then there is nothing in its place
We can't talk to someone that hasn't accepted causality.

At least agnosticism is better than atheism

Atheism and deism are the only two reasonable positions on God. And agnosticism is nothing but a statement of the degree or lack of supporting evidence.

 

[interminable]

To be honest, I am slightly skeptical of dark things, in general. They are too much reminiscent of the old ether theory. But I am not a professional physicist (although I know a bit about the subject), so there might be good reasons to accept it, I simply do not see. Being dark, probably, lol.



Be careful. There are very rational reasons to reject the asymmetry cause/effect, even if they are ultimately wrong. If you want, I can show you how it works. But in order to do that, I need to know your level of knowledge about fundamental physics and thermodynamics. I need that in order to adapt to the following up discussion.



Agnosticism is for sissies. Kidding of course, lol.

Ciao

- viole

I have no knowledge about physics and chemistry
But simply I couldn't reject logic and causality
That's why it's weird to me such statements

 

[interminable]

That's the same as saying that spacetime is a cause and effect of spacetime. We know the universe started, but not how, much less why.



If I can narrow down the possibilities to two, isn't that better than doing nothing in defense of atheism.



We can't, directly or indirectly. We can only say there's no evidence for God.



Atheism and deism are the only two reasonable positions on God. And agnosticism is nothing but a statement of the degree or lack of supporting evidence.

Reasonable???

This is a law in logic

If u couldn't find X it doesn't mean that X doesn't exist

A blind can't say I don't see so it doesn't exist

Atheists can't say there is no evidence so it doesn't exist

 

[viole]

I have no knowledge about physics and chemistry
But simply I couldn't reject logic and causality
That's why it's weird to me such statements

Well, where do you get your notion of cause/effect if not from the physical world?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Blastcat]

Can't u see these marvelous creatures and universes
Aren't they the best evidences of the existence of something intelligent????

What is the evidence that you are sane???
Can u show me???

The same is about god

Ok, you have no evidence for god.
That's was my point.

I have evidence of nature.
Not of ghosts, goblins or gods.

Those who deny god have to do two things
First reject causality

I HAVE to deny causality?
Gee wiz.
And I didn't want to.

Second define science as physics and chemistry

HUH?
I have to do that too?

Well, if you insist, but I usually think for myself, would that be alright?

But we just take on logic and prove it

We do?
I have no idea what you are talking about.
But I wasn't.

I THINK that I was asking you to "disprove Quetzalcoatl or something.. wasn't I?
Maybe it wasn't you .. maybe I was directing my question to someone else.

And MAYBE you have a point.
I just don't know what it might be.

 

[interminable]

Well, where do you get your notion of cause/effect if not from the physical world?

Ciao

- viole

Lady
Something that is very very clear doesn't need any reason
And cause/effect are like that

Besides u know the the notion of non existent isn't from physical world because non existent doesn't exist to be argued
But we have the ability to imagine even something that doesn't exist while u know non existent is nothing

In addition salt is salty
U can't say why salt is salty because being salty is in its nature

 

[jeager106]

When there is no explanation then God did it!
Case closed.

 

[viole]

Lady
Something that is very very clear doesn't need any reason
And cause/effect are like that

Well, since it is not clear at all to me, I think you have to justify it. Where did you get your notion of causality?

Besides u know the the notion of non existent isn't from physical world because non existent doesn't exist to be argued
But we have the ability to imagine even something that doesn't exist while u know non existent is nothing

i agree on the "imagine" thing.

In addition salt is salty
U can't say why salt is salty because being salty is in its nature

And in the nature of our brain wiring.

So, you seem to jump from a subject to multiple others. I might be tempted to think that you do not like to focus on your arguments in favor of causality, for some reason

Ciao

- viole

 

[Willamena]

If we aren't able to find evidence of existence of something does it mean that we should deny it's existence????????
?????
At least say we don't know whether it exists or not

If someone tells you there is a large African elephant tromping through the room in which you are standing, but you look around and see no evidence of that, yes!... Yes, you should deny it.

 

[interminable]

Ok, you have no evidence for god.
That's was my point.

I have evidence of nature.
Not of ghosts, goblins or gods.



I HAVE to deny causality?
Gee wiz.
And I didn't want to.



HUH?
I have to do that too?

Well, if you insist, but I usually think for myself, would that be alright?



We do?
I have no idea what you are talking about.
But I wasn't.

I THINK that I was asking you to "disprove Quetzalcoatl or something.. wasn't I?
Maybe it wasn't you .. maybe I was directing my question to someone else.

And MAYBE you have a point.
I just don't know what it might be.

In this thread atheists try to say something that there is no evidence of it definitely doesn't exist
I'm trying to say it's not

This thing Quet·zal·co·a·tl that I have never heard of if I can't find any evidence of its existence I can't really deny it


Anyway those who are theist they can deny existence of gods that are created by human beings

 

[interminable]

Well, since it is not clear at all to me, I think you have to justify it. Where did you get your notion of causality?



i agree on the "imagine" thing.



And in the nature of our brain wiring.

So, you seem to jump from a subject to multiple others. I might be tempted to think that you do not like to focus on your arguments in favor of causality, for some reason

Ciao

- viole

No no

U know what?

I can't explain them in English but I try

Look
I'm trying to say that for example we can't say
Contradiction or paradox is possible
Why??
Because we can't imagine something that is existent and non existent at the same time
Right?

Philosophers say this fact needs no reason because it's very very clear
And we just need to prepare reason for something that is vague

 

[interminable]

If someone tells you there is a large African elephant tromping through the room in which you are standing, but you look around and see no evidence of that, yes!... Yes, you should deny it.

If that elephant supposed to be visible and u can't see it yes if your eyes are good and u can't see u can deny that

As far as I know god is invisible because he isn't matter or energy or everything that u can imagine

So when we say all creatures are evidences of the existence of god it doesn't necessarily mean that God himself is matter or energy

Your comparison is wrong

 

[Willamena]

If that elephant supposed to be visible and u can't see it yes if your eyes are good and u can't see u can deny that

As far as I know god is invisible because he isn't matter or energy or everything that u can imagine

So when we say all creatures are evidence of the existence of god it doesn't necessarily mean that God himself is matter or energy

Your comparison is wrong

It's just an analogy of what is deniable. If "god," that is not energy or anything that I can imagine, is not evident, I do have good reason to deny it.

Unless the relation between "god" and the creatures can be explained.

 

[interminable]

It's just an analogy of what is deniable. If "god," that is not energy or anything that I can imagine, is not evident, I do have good reason to deny it.

Unless the relation between "god" and the creatures can be explained.

God is the only existence that is unlimited
Something that is unlimited can't be created from matter or energy
Simply because matter has some component and when it's components weren't combined it means there was a time when matter doesn't exist

So god isn't matter
Because god is a creator of time and space and everything u can see

We are limited how can limited reach and understand the nature of unlimited????

Infinite regress and circular reasoning are good for providing reason to prove the existence of something unlimited that we call first cause or God

 

[Willamena]

God is the only existence that is unlimited
Something that is unlimited can't be created from matter or energy
Simply because matter has some component and when it's components weren't combined it means there was a time when matter doesn't exist

So god isn't matter
Because god is a creator of time and space and everything u can see

We are limited how can limited reach and understand the nature of unlimited????

Infinite regress and circular reasoning are good for providing reason to prove the existence of something unlimited that we call first cause or God

If I cannot evidence "god" that is unlimited, then it is reasonable to deny it.

 

[interminable]

If I cannot evidence "god" that is unlimited, then it is reasonable to deny it.

No
Just say I don't know whether exist or not

U knowledge doesn't allow u to claim that


Somethings that we don't know are more than we know
So please just be rational
Maybe it exists

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Reasonable???

This is a law in logic

If u couldn't find X it doesn't mean that X doesn't exist

A blind can't say I don't see so it doesn't exist

Atheists can't say there is no evidence so it doesn't exist

Do you think it's ever reasonable to say that a species is extinct?

If the god in question would be expected to have some sort of evidence, then the absence of that evidence is the evidence of the god's absence.

And there's absolutely nothing wrong with saying that because there's no evidence for your god, your god is made up. When it comes right down to it, your objection really amounts to saying that atheists can't prove that theists serendipitously stumbled onto a god-concept that matches something real, even though it was just an unjustified wild guess.

Is *your* religion an unjustified wild guess?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Somethings that we don't know are more than we know
So please just be rational
Maybe it exists

Is your god a "something we don't know"?