Athiests...want evidence of God? Read here.

[Smart Money]

Quote from karol88:

I happen to know a few scientists (physics teachers and post docs) that believe in God. There are even some that are trying to prove the existence of God (I don't know if they will ever succeed though)

here are a few quotes for you (I could find more if I had the time)

Prof. D. Barton, Nobel Prize Chemistry:
"There is no incompatibility between science and religion... Science shows that God exists."

Ernst Boris Chain, Nobel prize winner:
"The principle of [divine] purpose ... stares the biologist in the face wherever he looks ... . The probability for such an event as the origin of DNA molecules to have occurred by sheer chance is just too small to be seriously considered ... ."

Alister McGrath (Molecular Biophysicist), Lee Stroebel, C.S. Lewis and Malcom Muggridge were all atheist until they looked at the evidence.

-------
There is even a book: 'The Evidence of God in an Expanding Universe' (1959) which consists of essay by forty famous scientists in different fields of science, who declare their affirmative views of God.

Dr. George Earl Davis, Physicist, University of Minnesota, U.S.A writes:

''That atheism exists in scientific circle is undeniable. But the popular belief that atheism is more prevalent among scientists than among the unscientific has never been proved and is, infect, contrary to the expressions gained at first hand by many of the scientists themselves.'' (Evidence p.70)

Dr. H.T.Stetson who was the Director of Perkins Observatory, Ohio, U.S.A. wrote:

''It is not without significance that many of the eminent men of science, have been devout followers of religion. Among such may be mentioned Galileo, Newton, Faraday, Kelvin and Pasteur. (Men and the Stars_ by H.T.Stetson p.214 Mc Graw Hill 1930)

I hate a "me too" post, but...me too. My background is science and the more I learn, and continue to learn, the more I believe. There are just too many improbable and amazing things. A statistician will tell you that when something is too improbable, there is causation somewhere.

SM

 

[volente_00]

Quote from kut2k2:

It's hard to know where to begin to deal with such ignorance and unfounded assumptions.

Your definitions are straight out of some mediocre junior high school book.

For starters, a theory is not an assumption, it is an explanation for something. If you say a theory is just a guess, then you have reached the level of Ronald Reagan, who famously said "a scientific theory is just a guess", proudly demonstrating his profound ignorance to the entire world.

A scientific theory is not just a guess, it is a TESTABLE guess. That is the foundation of science: testability. If it can't be tested, it is not a part of science. That is the secret of the success of science: it can be tested and retested, it can be demonstrated to children as well as to scholars of advanced age and experience, it is repeatable and independently verifiable. Most religions on the other hand, especially the Abrahamic religions, are just dry, boring lectures from a book written centuries ago by people who thought the world was flat.

No comparison.

BTW if you don't believe in science, why are you using a computer? Your disdain for science when you couldn't even function in the modern world without the fruits of science is as immature as it gets. It's so stupid, it's downright evil.

 

[volente_00]

Quote from kut2k2:

It's hard to know where to begin to deal with such ignorance and unfounded assumptions.

Your definitions are straight out of some mediocre junior high school book.

For starters, a theory is not an assumption, it is an explanation for something. If you say a theory is just a guess, then you have reached the level of Ronald Reagan, who famously said "a scientific theory is just a guess", proudly demonstrating his profound ignorance to the entire world.

A scientific theory is not just a guess, it is a TESTABLE guess. That is the foundation of science: testability. If it can't be tested, it is not a part of science. That is the secret of the success of science: it can be tested and retested, it can be demonstrated to children as well as to scholars of advanced age and experience, it is repeatable and independently verifiable. Most religions on the other hand, especially the Abrahamic religions, are just dry, boring lectures from a book written centuries ago by people who thought the world was flat.

No comparison.

BTW if you don't believe in science, why are you using a computer? Your disdain for science when you couldn't even function in the modern world without the fruits of science is as immature as it gets. It's so stupid, it's downright evil.

My definitions were straight out of the current webster dictionary. Why do you have problem with the TRUTH of them ?


So why did you avoid the question ?


Do you believe there was a civil war in the US in the 1860's ?



A scientific theory is not a guess ?

If it can't be tested, it is not a part of science?


Then why is there string theory ?

 

[volente_00]

Quote from Smart Money:

I hate a "me too" post, but...me too. My background is science and the more I learn, and continue to learn, the more I believe. There are just too many improbable and amazing things. A statistician will tell you that when something is too improbable, there is causation somewhere.

SM

Nonsense. The religion called "science" can explain everything and if it can't then you can place "faith" in the unproven theories that do.

 

[smilingsynic]

Quote from volente_00:

My definitions were straight out of the current webster dictionary. Why do you have problem with the TRUTH of them ?


So why did you avoid the question ?


Do you believe there was a civil war in the US in the 1860's ?



A scientific theory is not a guess ?

If it can't be tested, it is not a part of science?


Then why is there string theory ?

Please, my friend, stick to the S&P.

A scientific theory is not a guess. It is the most reasonable explanation based on all of the currently collected evidence.

 

[volente_00]

Quote from smilingsynic:

Please, my friend, stick to the S&P.

A scientific theory is not a guess. It is the most reasonable explanation based on all of the currently collected evidence.

Then why is it called scientific theory and not scientific fact ?


You want me to believe assumptions just because >51% of scientists do ?

 

[kut2k2]

Quote from volente_00:

My definitions were straight out of the current webster dictionary. Why do you have problem with the TRUTH of them ?

I should have known you were just a pathological liar.

theory

1: the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another

2: abstract thought : speculation

3: the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art <music theory>

4 a: a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action <her method is based on the theory that all children want to learn>
4 b: an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principles, or circumstances —often used in the phrase in theory<in theory, we have always advocated freedom for all>

5: a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena <the wave theory of light>

6 a: a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation
6 b: an unproved assumption : conjecture
6 c: a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject <theory of equations>

Strange how the word assumption doesn't appear until sense 6, AND IT IS QUALIFIED. Strange how you selected to leave the qualifications out of your "definition".

Anyone can take selective definitions of ambiguous words to misconstrue what they mean in a given context. This is grade school crap.

So why did you avoid the question ?

Do you believe there was a civil war in the US in the 1860's ?

Yes, there was a civil war. I ignored the question because it was foolish and immature. I never said science had a monopoly on the search for truth. We weren't talking about human history, we were talking about natural history. Your inability to stay on topic is hardly MY fault.

A scientific theory is not a guess ?

Reading difficulty?

If it can't be tested, it is not a part of science?

Then why is there string theory ?

String theory is being tested as we speak. The final results aren't in yet.

Speaking of ignoring questions, why are you using a computer when you have no belief in science? Until you can honestly answer that one, you're just a troll looking to be disagreeable just for the hell of it.

 

[Mav88]

volente, anyone who has to quote a dictionary about science doesn't know shit. Your explaination of what a theory represents is quite stupid- give it up.

Nonsense. The religion called "science" can explain everything and if it can't then you can place "faith" in the unproven theories that do.

science by definition is lack of faith, again dazzling ignorance on display.


The logical fallacy of the OP can be summed up here:

"The argument from personal incredulity, also known as argument from personal belief or argument from personal conviction, refers to an assertion that because one personally finds a premise unlikely or unbelievable, the premise can be assumed to be false, or alternatively that another preferred but unproven premise is true instead."

 

[Mav88]

Then why is it called scientific theory and not scientific fact ?

you have no clue what you are talking about volente, all you can do is parrot the same old stupid arguments from creationists.

 

[murray t turtle]

Quote from kut2k2:

There's a huge difference between faith and blind faith. A reasonable person can have faith, but blind faith calls for the lack of reason.

I don't know your religion but I'd bet you're an Abrahamist (Jew, Christian or Muslim). That's a good bet because most modern theists are now Abrahamists.

The God of Abraham requires blind faith. The evidence against your Old Testament or your Koran is overwhelming, even in this forum alone, and I won't bother repeating it. Reasonable ETers already know it, and the unreasonable ones will never acknowledge it.

If you're going to argue faith, maybe you should know the basics first.

=====================
Kut2;
I hope your/my trading has as much accuracy as our posts;
over a long period of time/lifetime.

But while there is plenty of Hebrew-Christian evidence for faith;
much study at all shows the Koran has not in the same accuracy as the Holy Bible.There is somewhat of a blessing on Ishmael[black gold.....]Ishmael is Abe's bastard kid.

Now faith is the substance......Hebrews 11;1a/Holy Bible
Substance means title deed. Non believers are simply like renters who chose not or are to ignorant to buy into a title deed;
or renters who fault find people who do have title deeds to real estate.