It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Can science prove this???....

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 04:41 PM
link   
I was wondering about religion the other day and had a long conversation with a couple of buddies. I said to them..."if you look at science and how far its gone in the last couple of years, dont you think that one day we will be able to disprove the Christian GOD?."
Before you start answering, i want to bring up an interesting point. If we were to take a look at Egyptians for example and take a look at their religion. I think its safe to say that Egyptians were VERY religiuos. They had high standards for priests and wat not and its was taken very seriuosly. How many gods did the Egyptians have??...ia m not to sure, but i am pretty sure there were quite a few. there was, correct me if i am wrong, a god for water (the nile and the tides it has) and a god of the afterlife, a god of the heavens, god of the seasons....blah blah blah and so on.
the point i am trying to make is that with our modern day scientific knowledge we can easily disprove many of their gods. We know that the Nile floods every year because of the water cycle and melting of water during the flood season. We know that the earth has seasons becasue of the rotation around the sun. All these things that we know are so logical and common knowledge, but for them they had gods.
Do u think based on this logic will will be able to one day disprove other gods, not neccesarily only the christian one, but any of them.
I want to know if ppl think maybe we have already begun to disporve christianity through the idea of evolution.
Wat other things swing that way, and i mean solid scientific proof.
can someone outline the scientific disproofs of god that we have or at least give their opinion on some of them.
I know some ppl are gonna say its not about proof, its about faith, but iam sure the egyptians would have said the exact same thing. Imagine going back in time and telling them that most of their gods can easily be disproven. they would shun you without thought.




posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 04:57 PM
link   
God can not be disproved because he is real. You can disprove the other Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Mesopotamian gods first of all by common sense, secondly by science. How are you going to disprove the Christian God? The Bible says he created everything. Once you have actual, factual proof that it was not created by God, and God isnt real then ill belive you. So far there isnt an explonation can can truly disproof that God did not create the universe. And if there was that would mean he's not real. (But he is).
P.S: This should be move to the religious forum.

[edit on 12-7-2004 by AD5673]



posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by AD5673
God can not be disproved because he is real. You can disprove the other Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Mesopotamian gods first of all by common sense, secondly by science. How are you going to disprove the Christian God? The Bible says he created everything. Once you have actual, factual proof that it was not created by God, and God isnt real then ill belive you. So far there isnt an explonation can can truly disproof that God did not create the universe. And if there was that would mean he's not real. (But he is).


Do you have any proof that God really does exist? I mean are we suppose to swallow the Bible as true just because some priest says we should? There are strong arguments for both sides. There is no real proof that he exists and there isn't any proof that he doesn't. In terms of religion we are in a quandra. Society tells us he exist. Science points to the real possibility that we are a mathermatical probability in the great ecosystem of the Universe.



posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 05:14 PM
link   
you cannot prove that god doesn't exist, as that would require everyone to believe and accept it. in my experience, those who are religious (particularly christians) do not have a concept of a life without god. they cannot believe god does not exist because they have been programmed to believe that its not possible,because god created everything. in their minds, if god doesn't exist, then neither can any of us, therefore since we do exist, so must god.
go figure



posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 05:32 PM
link   


Do you have any proof that God really does exist? I mean are we suppose to swallow the Bible as true just because some priest says we should? There are strong arguments for both sides. There is no real proof that he exists and there isn't any proof that he doesn't. In terms of religion we are in a quandra. Society tells us he exist. Science points to the real possibility that we are a mathermatical probability in the great ecosystem of the Universe.

You dont have any proof that he doesnt. Look through out history. There is evidnce that prooves that Jesus existed. If Jesus exists...so does God. This should be moved to the religous forum anyway.

[edit on 12-7-2004 by AD5673]



posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 05:36 PM
link   
You can not disprove God with science because science is simply "Natural Philosophy".

It is no more real than Gods or God. It is a different interpretation of events. Is it more accurate? No. It is simply a different interpretation. If accuracy were the ability to predict and manipulate events, than science is more accurate. However, science will not predict or manipulate everything, therefore something is beyond science and that is what "God" simply is.

For example, a buzzard lands on a tree, and then the tree is struck by lightning.

Someone might say that the buzzard is evil so the "gods" struck the tree and destroyed all that the evil thing had touched. Another might say an imbalance in charge led to a discharge of energy from one charge to the other, there-by restoring the balance and the buzzard was merely coincidental.

The same events, two different interpretations, one interpretation only seeks a simple answer, so the idea of "God" is simple, some being like people that has human qualities such as emotions.

The other interpretation is more complicated, requiring a more complicated understand of "God".

In the latter, God or the "gods" did nothing to that tree, it was natural phenomena. Thus God must be the phenomena (and thus nothing like a person) or must be greater than what we've currently been able to explain, most complicated would be an explaination involving both.

"God is the creation as much as the creator."

In a sense, God did not "create" anything, it's always been in some form of existance, but he shaped whether conciously or not, existance as we know it.

These more complicated interpretations fit science, and brings me to the ultimate point.

Science will never disprove God, only disprove what we call God. In the future, as science becomes more vast and we are able to predict more and manipulate more, God will become a far more complicated abstraction than we currently can fathom.

Just as people 2,000 years ago could not fathom the idea of a God that is "beyond space-time". We can not fathom what future generations will view as God.

Ultimately, should we have enough time, we may discover God, and it may be nothing like we currently imagine, but God is there.

After all, what is God but nature? If we discover our souls and what happens to them when we die, what is that but nature?

Finally, as I pointed out to someone, I shall repeate in an allegory.


Someone asked me to prove God, and I told him, "The proof is right here" and I showed to him a grain of sand. The person of course scoffed and said, "That is not proof, that is just sand" to which I replied, "it is proof, you are merely asking for more evidence then there is."


Someone may ask you for proof that 2 + 2 = 4 and you may give them the proof. But if they demand that you prove it using logarithms, your simple explaination of 2 stones and 2 stones equals 4 stones, will not be accepted by them.

They will not see your answer, but that does not make you wrong.

And in conclusion, that is science, it is not the disproof of God.

Science is our search for what God really is, is he a man on a throne? A vengful warrior? A force of nature? Or something so infinitely beyond those concepts that we at this time can not yet fathom its existence?



posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 05:50 PM
link   
It is imposible to disprove anything. Nothing has ever been disproved....even egyptian gods.

All you can do is prove what does exist and accept everything else as unfounded and unproven.

Science has never disproved anything.

For example, current theory of gravity involves gravitons moving through multiple dimensions....but this is not disproof that gravity is carried by invisible in tangable imps on rollerskates.

God will never be disproved...nor with any egyptian gods. The Egyptians said the sun was a ball of fire, the soul of Ra, pushed across the sky by a giant beetle...Can you disprove this?

I bet you can show evidence it is actualy a ball of fussion that the earth orbits. But that just another theory with suporting evidence...thats an alternate theory...you haven't disproved anything. Thats impossible.



posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by AD5673
God can not be disproved because he is real. You can disprove the other Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Mesopotamian gods first of all by common sense, secondly by science. How are you going to disprove the Christian God? The Bible says he created everything. [edit on 12-7-2004 by AD5673]


Now how you can argue with that kind of logic?


I liked Free Mason's views. And although I'm an atheist, I noticed how many believers in god have similar views. The more science evolves and advances, peoples view of god also changes. I see more posters here on ATS identifying god as someone who works in concert with natural law rather than being the god of the bible who can basically do anything he wants and is not subject to any science.

As ingrained as god has come into our culture I doubt highly that we will ever see an end to the worship of a deity, but I do believe that his "persona" will be further refined.



posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 05:55 PM
link   
I am going to carry 2 proverbial swords, one in each hand.
On one hand, in regards to Science... Science is ultimately based on Reason.
Reason can be derived from both logic and observation. It is the recognition of patterns in our known world. God(s) are intangible and therefore undefinable, it is no more reasonable to find God in a black hole than each mircomanaged migration of each sand particle. Instead Science views complex events in a system, which is a construct of many pieces of tested and repeatable observation working together. Who can say that it is whether God or chaos that controls all of the systems at once. No one knows, thus it is left to be open for further experimentation and observation. God(s) are in principle infinite according to general belief, thus until man can Reason a complex system of infinties and be 99% sure of his/her observation, then God(s) shall remain intangible.

On the other hand, noting the spirit sword, with my leanings toward modern paganism/techno-paganism, our spiritual parents operate these systems in patterns, not out of convienence, but effciency. The ever expanding multiverse is quite possibly the only naturally occuring perpetual motion machine to exist. Microcosmically, perhaps it is strings that the God(s) work with for minute operations to adjust the larger systems subtly.

In short order of understanding God:
Science's only limitation lies in the observational abilities of life's most intelligent creature. Right now, that is mankind.
Religeon's only limitation lies in the imagination and faith of life's most
inteliligent creature. See above.

Perhaps in the far future, another system of mental exercise may come about in revealing Truth to Earth based intelligent life, it may be happening now with the psychic gifts that are waking up in recent years, or some form of mental mutation that is generating silent communication between people, or it may happen with flesh and machine become one and cross communicate by radio or electromagnetic signals. just my 2

[edit on 12-7-2004 by Crysstaafur]



posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 05:58 PM
link   
First, it is nearly impossible to prove that something DOESN'T exist. Science has not and cannot prove that Bigfoot doesn't exist, or that aliens don't exist - the laws of science are applied to prove that something does exist. Even if science is able to fully explain in detail every single thing on this earth and how it got here it will never be able to prove through imperical study that God does not exist.

However, I propose that just the opposite will happen - science will ultimately PROVE the existance of God. And I'm not talking about any religions view of God I mean the higher power from which all things flow. Many of us may have to change our views of God once this happens but they will find proof that God (in some form or fashion) does exist.



posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 06:03 PM
link   
Well.

We seem to have some fans of "Common Sense" here. I offer the following text. Note that it is not my own, but written by someone else. I saved it a while back and lost the source (sorry about that). Still, I think it is an excellent piece.

Quote:

Every possible form which energy and/or matter can take, must be in use and exists today in time and space. Why? Because we are always in the middle of Eternity. Eternity is a two way street. Eternity runs both ways don't you know. These forms will include universes about which we know nothing. It will include undiscovered transformations of energy/matter, and any other undiscovered condition, forms or expressions which energy and/or matter may take.

When we speak of a God here, we are only speaking of that concept fostered upon us by the Christian religion which claims that a God is the creator of all that is. They claim a God was preexistent. That is, before there was anything, there was a God.

By using this Christian definition, we are eliminating the many varied little concepts of a God. Most of those activities, miracles and controversies (if they are true) could also be attributed to some super race of long lived aliens, and they need not be classified as gods. Aliens could easily possess powers, technologies and abilities which seem god like to our infant science. But, they are only advancements which some day even we may possess. So we are only dealing with the Christian concept of a creator God.

To say that before anything existed, a God existed, is an oxymoron. Such a statement can neither be understood nor conceived by our minds. It can not possibly be true and here is why. If a God existed, then that God is something. And something is not nothing. So the universe could not have possibly come from nothing. It must have come from something. Thom's law explains that.

Thom's Law
"Nothing can not produce something. If there were ever a time when there was nothing, there would STILL be nothing."*

*For a more comprehensive understanding of Thom's Law click here.

So even a God (which is something) could not be produced by nothing. Therefore, if a God came into being, he must have come out of something. The only "something" which exists now and has always existed is that of energy and/or matter.

So, any God (or anything else) must be, or must have been, the product of something. Everything which is, must be a product of energy and/or matter.

Now that is strike one against the Christians who say that a God preexisted nothing. Or, as some say, a God coexisted with nothing. That is, while there was nothing, there was also a God. (Unless, of course, you wish to claim that God IS nothing. I could accept that claim, but then I would not be here would I? Proof enough. I am here.) So, you can not have a God (which is something) and say that before him, there was nothing. You must either start with a God, which is something (and came from something) or you must start with nothing. For sure, you can not have it both ways. If there is a God, he is something and something can not come out of nothing.

Strike two says, since there was something which must have predated a God, God could not have created everything. He could not have created himself if he was not himself to start with. God himself/herself/it would have to be developed from something that was NOT a God. God is claimed to have knowledge and character. Knowledge and character MUST be developed. It can not be decreed. It can not be magically waved into existence. Knowledge and character is a PRODUCT of life and living. It is a product of making wise and foolish choices. It is a product of growth.

Did a God have the knowledge to create or make a universe? Where did he develop that knowledge? It is inconceivable that God simply sneezed and the universe came into being. I don't think even the Christians would believe that.

To have the knowledge to create, or even to make a universe, God must have had some prior experience, some development, some trials and errors in how and why this worked and that did not. Also, the Christians claim lots of wonderful attributes for their God. God is all good. God is all great. God is all just. God is all wise. God is all knowing. God is everywhere. God is all powerful, and so forth.

That is, the Christians give God a good, moral and powerful character. Now character can not be developed in a vacuum. Character must be developed by trial and error. Character must be developed by finding out what is good and what works. To do this one must also find out what is bad and does not work. Character must always answer the question, "Why?" in order to develop. Character is a growth process.

Therefore, there must have been other individuals and intelligences with whom God could interact in order to develop a good character. There must be at least a family of them. Therefore, God is not alone. So, other intelligence demands some type of setting in which they could interact. They must have a place, a home of sorts. So we now must allow God to have at least a family, a home and a setting, or a place of operating, in order to develop his character. So that is strike two against a creator God being by HIMSELF, and at the same time having both a good character and ultimate science knowledge. God could not decree himself a good character or vast scientific knowledge. He would not know what was good or what to decree. He must have developed that knowledge.

In addition to this, God talked! How could a God language develop without other like beings with whom to communicate. Come on now! Think about it!

Next, we come to strike three. If there was something out of which God came, then there was already material available to make a universe. That is, God could not possibly have created the universe. However, God could have MADE the universe. That is, he could have taken the material which was available and MADE the universe out of that.

The Christian information about a creation comes from a mistranslation of the Jewish Testament. The Jewish text reads:
"In beginning, the GODS MADE the heaven and the earth."

The Christians CHANGED that to read:

"In THE beginning, GOD CREATED the heaven and the earth."

In other words, the concept of a creation stems from a MISTRANSLATION - from a LIE. Think about that!
Either the God of the Old Testament made a mistake and used the word "made" when he should have used the word "create" in telling us about a beginning, or the New Testament God made a mistake and used the word "create" instead of the word "made" to describe a beginning. In other words, one of these Gods is lying to us. Which God is lying to us?

Since the Old Testament God told his tale first and then the New Testament God plagiarized his work, I must assume the New Testament God is the real liar in this case. Of course, if you do not wish to give the New Testament God the credit for this lie, you could give that credit to the writers of the holy book.

There are those Christians who say (in spite of Thom's law) that God did come out of nothing. I have some questions. Is God supposed to be greater than the universe? The Christians say, "Yes." Then why didn't NOTHING create something smaller or less significant than a God in its first effort at creation? Why didn't NOTHING do something simple first? How would NOTHING have the wisdom to make something more important and more complex than itself, more important and complex than the whole universe? Why didn't NOTHING make the universe first and then make a God?

How did NOTHING make a God when it had not yet discovered how to make the hydrogen atom? The effort of making a God would have challenged all the resources of NOTHING, which resources of course is zero. Hydrogen atoms would not have strained the efforts, knowledge and power of NOTHING nearly as much as making something greater than the universe.

Did you know that believers in all ages have created gods? Today believers can create too! They make lots of gods using only the twenty six letters of the English alphabet.

Now it is a fact, you can not put a strain on zero. You can multiply it. You can divide it. You can add it. You can kick zero around, abuse it, smash it, cast it aside and guess what? It is still a perfect zero. So I do here by declare ZERO to be the only perfect number in the universe. Nothing you can do to it changes the value of ZERO. It is always and for ever - ZERO. You just can not get anything out of ZERO except ZERO. And NOTHING is ZERO. And ZERO is NOTHING. A God did not and COULD NOT come out of ZERO.

So, the Christian concept of a creator God goes down on a called strike three. From now on, the creator God must take his seat on the bench next to the rest of the religious gods who struck out. A God could not have preexisted that from which he came. He could not create himself. He could not create the universe without vast knowledge which he must have learned by trial and error. He could not have learned without other intelligence with whom to interact. He could not have created the universe from nothing when material (energy/matter) was already available from which to make it. The creator God strikes out.

Since there is no creator God, maybe there is a Maker God. Let us examine that next.



posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Quest
God will never be disproved...nor with any egyptian gods. The Egyptians said the sun was a ball of fire, the soul of Ra, pushed across the sky by a giant beetle...Can you disprove this?


I am sorry, but do u see a beetle pushing the sun across the sky??....I dunno about u, but i certainly don't.

For the people that say u cant disprove anything, well how about someone that can disprove that 2+2=5???...i think thats easily disproven.

By the way, this is a perfect example of wat i was trying to say. That everyone NOW beleives that you cant disprove the christian god, just as how an egyptian would say ur a crackpot if u told him ud disprove one of his gods.



posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 06:09 PM
link   
concur with bad kitty. it is very difficult to prove that something doesnt exist.

also re the mention that if jesus existed then god exists. that doesnt really prove anything. the question would be if you could prove that he was the son of god then god would exist. there would be those would would argue that he existed but was only a man.

another point to consider: all of this depends too on your definition of god, even within the christian faith there would be quite a variety in the definition of what god is, from the spectrum of the active god who answers prayers etc. to more of the "force of the universe" type concept on the other extreme and everything in between. how can you prove or disprove something when you cant even agree on what it is you would be proving or disproving?

my own personal theory would that scientific advances would bring us closer to understanding god, but never to the total understanding.



posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by LuDaCrIs

For the people that say u cant disprove anything, well how about someone that can disprove that 2+2=5???...i think thats easily disproven.


This is a poor example - this is not proving the existance of something it is a simple calculation. However, if you want to go there - the only way to disprove this is to prove something else, as in 2+2=4. It is still about providing PROOF of something that is, not something that is not.

But your example is illogical - it is not a scientific test it is a mathamatical formula. We are talking about disproving the possible existance of something. How can you prove that something doesn't exist, especially when we are talking about someting with an infinate environment? How would you prove that aliens don't exist or never existed? What evidence could you possible give that could be tested and replicated that would prove that aliens do not exist?



posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 06:29 PM
link   
You cannot prove a negative. So no, science cannot prove God doesn't exist. But scientifically, you can't believe in something you haven't proven does exist.



posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoterica
You cannot prove a negative. So no, science cannot prove God doesn't exist. But scientifically, you can't believe in something you haven't proven does exist.


I thought that is what a hypothysis or a theory is all about? You have an idea (theory), you believe it may be fact, you set out to prove it. If you can't prove it, your idea may be wrong, or you haven't used the proper tools or method to prove it. It still may be right. You may decided you need to take a new approach - you try a different way to prove it. This can go on endlessly if you "believe" in your theory.

Human evolution is still unproven (yes there is evidence that indicates it may be correct but it has not been proven) yet many believe.



posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 07:07 PM
link   
God exists in the same way that time exists in our minds in our perceptions.

No proof really that time exists outside of our own minds and perceptions. It is simple really. If your born were none have ever thought of or heard of a god then a god will not exist.

I beleive there is probably a consiousness to the creation of our universe and perhaps that consiousness defind destiny from begining to end and that could include christ etc....

Other than the written words of very uneducated man we have no proof that the bible god exists at all just words and self induced imotional experiences (I had em myself when I was a kid and went to church) I can repeat those feelings without thinking of god or the bible.

So I continue to beleive that its possible that part of the Bible is true. I dont think science can prove or disprove it even once we figure out how it all started. cause something had to be first and be the cause and that is impossible to know without seeing it or being there IMO.

Even if you prove the big bang then what created the thing that caused the big bang hehe....

Unless there is a god who wants to come tell us and show us we will never know either one for sure. GOd is a personal choice and experience for now...

[edit on 12-7-2004 by Xeven]



posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 07:30 PM
link   
Xeven - excellent example "Time". We created it and a way to measure it but it is not an actual tangible/physical thing that we can scientifically prove the existnce of.

But I disagree on one point you make - "If your born were none have ever thought of or heard of a god then a god will not exist."

While it is true - we have not proven the existance of god in scientific terms - maybe we never will. But then again, we might. We may find that god is an energy form we have yet to discover. But either way - a humans lack of knowledge of something does not constitute it's non-existance. Most people in the world have not heard of me - does that mean I don't exist? I may not be part of most peoples personal experiences or reality but I exist none the less.



posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by AD5673
You can disprove the other Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Mesopotamian gods first of all by common sense, secondly by science. [edit on 12-7-2004 by AD5673]



How can you say this? How can science disprove there GODs? Let me ask you this, does that mean all the others in todays world can be disproved also? If people from the past where wrong, Why cant people of today?



To answer the thread topic, I think that science may be able to disprove God in the future, It will be far in the future..... Here is the thing, If they do,(who ever they are) do you think the people of power will let it out that people have been living a lie for atleast 2000 years. No, there would be mass Chaos.........



posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 08:41 PM
link   
God doesn't seem to produce any good tangible real results that i can see, and science does. Science does a good if not perfect job of explaining the world around me. and NEVER let perfect be the enemy of good. Math and science give you something to work with. They should be combined with the creative imagination to bear the fruit that betters the human condition.

Additionally let's not lean on math, science and technology too much, limiting our thoughts, the way some people do on God. Reach out for the wierd, spooky, different, unusual, the strange. The Universe should spark your imagination and make you curious. It is full of strange facts and anomalies. I believe there are realms and probably Universes beyond this one.

Learn the best of the 'facts' about this Universe and use it as your starting point and safe harbor to explore the realms of your imagination and dreams.




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join