Does Science Suggest the Existence of God?

[Ringtone]

Beyond the ramifications of the first principles of logic and metaphysics which absolutely tells us that God must be. . . .

 

[Mac1958]

Science admits there's much it doesn't know. That's one of its neatest features -- it knows there's much to learn and discover.

Since no one can know the answer to this question, science will continue to ask questions.

 

[alang1216]

Beyond the ramifications of the first principles of logic and metaphysics which absolutely tells us that God must be. . . .

Standard 'God of the Gaps' arguments. We don't know or can't explain it so it must have been God. The argument also assumes that if there is a creator he must be the same God as in the OT/NT. Every religion has creation myths and there is no link between the creator and God beyond some meaningless semantic argument (e.g., in English they are considered synonyms).

 

[occupied]

If God exists then God must certainly be bound to the physical laws of the universe. That alone would make God nothing like any religion says he is and his existence an unanswerable and therefore meaningless question.

 

[Ben Thomson]

It is always been so. When something can't quite be answered scientifically YET..well it must be God. When the day time sun went dark every now and then it was universally believed it was a sign from God, until astronomy eventually explained it.

 

[edthecynic]

NO!

 

[Hollie]

Beyond the ramifications of the first principles of logic and metaphysics which absolutely tells us that God must be. . . .

There are no first principles of logic that support claims to supernaturalism.

Metaphysics may suggest anything you want because ultimately there is no requirement for the conclusions to be valid or not.

Metaphysics is the sacred cow of ID'iot creationer ministries because magic and supernaturalism is not a of science. Metaphysics is as useful as tarot card reading when introduced into the realm of science. It produces nothing of any real utility for investigating the natural world and ultimately, no requirement for 'philosophical' arguments to be true or factual.

By way of example, the Disco'tutes' definition of ID'iot creationism is ''metaphysical''. Their FAQ answering questions about ID:

"The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.''

Evolutionary theory, for one example, is a theory consistent with the scientific method analyzing data. It is not a philosophically as is metaphysics or a religion.

Getting your limited knowledge of science from cut and paste youtube videos is a mistake.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Beyond the ramifications of the first principles of logic and metaphysics which absolutely tells us that God must be. . . .

There are no first principles of logic that support claims to supernaturalism.

Metaphysics may suggest anything you want because ultimately there is no requirement for the conclusions to be valid or not.

Metaphysics is the sacred cow of ID'iot creationer ministries because magic and supernaturalism is not a of science. Metaphysics is as useful as tarot card reading when introduced into the realm of science. It produces nothing of any real utility for investigating the natural world and ultimately, no requirement for 'philosophical' arguments to be true or factual.

By way of example, the Disco'tutes' definition of ID'iot creationism is ''metaphysical''. Their FAQ answering questions about ID:

"The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.''

Evolutionary theory, for one example, is a theory consistent with the scientific method analyzing data. It is not a philosophically as is metaphysics or a religion.

Getting your limited knowledge of science from cut and paste youtube videos is a mistake.

How did the big bang, happen? How did a bunch of cells suddenly evolve into sapient creatures of thought, without any intelligent design? If there was none, then we would all look like a Picasso painting.

 

[Ringtone]

Science admits there's much it doesn't know. That's one of its neatest features -- it knows there's much to learn and discover.

Since no one can know the answer to this question, science will continue to ask questions.

Speak for yourself. I know God exists.

 

[Ringtone]

Beyond the ramifications of the first principles of logic and metaphysics which absolutely tells us that God must be. . . .

There are no first principles of logic that support claims to supernaturalism.

Metaphysics may suggest anything you want because ultimately there is no requirement for the conclusions to be valid or not.

Metaphysics is the sacred cow of ID'iot creationer ministries because magic and supernaturalism is not a of science. Metaphysics is as useful as tarot card reading when introduced into the realm of science. It produces nothing of any real utility for investigating the natural world and ultimately, no requirement for 'philosophical' arguments to be true or factual.

By way of example, the Disco'tutes' definition of ID'iot creationism is ''metaphysical''. Their FAQ answering questions about ID:

"The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.''

Evolutionary theory, for one example, is a theory consistent with the scientific method analyzing data. It is not a philosophically as is metaphysics or a religion.

Getting your limited knowledge of science from cut and paste youtube videos is a mistake.

How did the big bang, happen? How did a bunch of cells suddenly evolve into sapient creatures of thought, without any intelligent design? If there was none, then we would all look like a Picasso painting.

Standard 'God of the Gaps' arguments. We don't know or can't explain it so it must have been God. The argument also assumes that if there is a creator he must be the same God as in the OT/NT. Every religion has creation myths and there is no link between the creator and God beyond some meaningless semantic argument (e.g., in English they are considered synonyms).

Standard atheist in the gaps slogan speak. The ramifications of the first principles of logic and metaphysics tell us that God must be. Science affirms that the rational forms and logical categories of human consciousness are reliable. An actual infinite does not and cannot exist. The physical world began to exist in the finite past.

 

[Ringtone]

Getting your limited knowledge of science from cut and paste youtube videos is a mistake.

You don't fly anywhere near my altitude of learning in the pertinent sciences. Not even close.

 

[Ringtone]

If God exists then God must certainly be bound to the physical laws of the universe. That alone would make God nothing like any religion says he is and his existence an unanswerable and therefore meaningless question.

Baby talk. Classic theism asserts no such thing. Where did you get your degree in religious studies? From the School of Hackneyed Slogan Speak?

 

[Ringtone]

NO!

Yes!

 

[Ringtone]

It is always been so. When something can't quite be answered scientifically YET..well it must be God. When the day time sun went dark every now and then it was universally believed it was a sign from God, until astronomy eventually explained it.

Pseudoscientific gibberish.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Beyond the ramifications of the first principles of logic and metaphysics which absolutely tells us that God must be. . . .

There are no first principles of logic that support claims to supernaturalism.

Metaphysics may suggest anything you want because ultimately there is no requirement for the conclusions to be valid or not.

Metaphysics is the sacred cow of ID'iot creationer ministries because magic and supernaturalism is not a of science. Metaphysics is as useful as tarot card reading when introduced into the realm of science. It produces nothing of any real utility for investigating the natural world and ultimately, no requirement for 'philosophical' arguments to be true or factual.

By way of example, the Disco'tutes' definition of ID'iot creationism is ''metaphysical''. Their FAQ answering questions about ID:

"The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.''

Evolutionary theory, for one example, is a theory consistent with the scientific method analyzing data. It is not a philosophically as is metaphysics or a religion.

Getting your limited knowledge of science from cut and paste youtube videos is a mistake.

How did the big bang, happen? How did a bunch of cells suddenly evolve into sapient creatures of thought, without any intelligent design? If there was none, then we would all look like a Picasso painting.

Standard 'God of the Gaps' arguments. We don't know or can't explain it so it must have been God. The argument also assumes that if there is a creator he must be the same God as in the OT/NT. Every religion has creation myths and there is no link between the creator and God beyond some meaningless semantic argument (e.g., in English they are considered synonyms).

Standard atheist in the gaps slogan speak. The ramifications of the first principles of logic and metaphysics tell us that God must be. Science affirms that the rational forms and logical categories of human consciousness are reliable. An actual infinite does not and cannot exist. The physical world began to exist in the finite past.

Did you know i was agreeing with you? That there must be intelligent design, because babies are not just a bunch of cells that randomly come together.....

 

[Hollie]

Beyond the ramifications of the first principles of logic and metaphysics which absolutely tells us that God must be. . . .

There are no first principles of logic that support claims to supernaturalism.

Metaphysics may suggest anything you want because ultimately there is no requirement for the conclusions to be valid or not.

Metaphysics is the sacred cow of ID'iot creationer ministries because magic and supernaturalism is not a of science. Metaphysics is as useful as tarot card reading when introduced into the realm of science. It produces nothing of any real utility for investigating the natural world and ultimately, no requirement for 'philosophical' arguments to be true or factual.

By way of example, the Disco'tutes' definition of ID'iot creationism is ''metaphysical''. Their FAQ answering questions about ID:

"The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.''

Evolutionary theory, for one example, is a theory consistent with the scientific method analyzing data. It is not a philosophically as is metaphysics or a religion.

Getting your limited knowledge of science from cut and paste youtube videos is a mistake.

How did the big bang, happen? How did a bunch of cells suddenly evolve into sapient creatures of thought, without any intelligent design? If there was none, then we would all look like a Picasso painting.

There was no big bang. There was no explosion. The Ill-named "Big Bang" refers to the expansion of universe, not a literal explosion. The idea that the universe had a beginning unique to a location (or an entity), is the remnant of an imaginative description by physicists. The so-called Big Bang was a major disruption in time and space followed by expansion of the universe.

Contrary to the indoctrination you received at your ID'iot creationer ministries, biochemistry is not a ''chance'', occurrence. It inevitably produces complex products. Amino acids and other complex molecules are even known to form in space. The major elements of life are abundant in the universe and there would be incalculable numbers of biochemical interactions occurring simultaneously.

The ramifications of the first principles of magic, supernaturalism and metaphysics tells us that ID'iot creationers will invoke magic and supernaturalism to account for their gods but that suggests a plethora of gods.

How did your gods and all the other gods come into existence? What was the first cause of the gods?

 

[Hollie]

Getting your limited knowledge of science from cut and paste youtube videos is a mistake.

You don't fly anywhere near my altitude of learning in the pertinent sciences. Not even close.

I certainly don't fly at your altitude of learning which is a low, thick fog.

It seems you're little more than a YouTube groupie so you might want to be silent and learn.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Beyond the ramifications of the first principles of logic and metaphysics which absolutely tells us that God must be. . . .

There are no first principles of logic that support claims to supernaturalism.

Metaphysics may suggest anything you want because ultimately there is no requirement for the conclusions to be valid or not.

Metaphysics is the sacred cow of ID'iot creationer ministries because magic and supernaturalism is not a of science. Metaphysics is as useful as tarot card reading when introduced into the realm of science. It produces nothing of any real utility for investigating the natural world and ultimately, no requirement for 'philosophical' arguments to be true or factual.

By way of example, the Disco'tutes' definition of ID'iot creationism is ''metaphysical''. Their FAQ answering questions about ID:

"The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.''

Evolutionary theory, for one example, is a theory consistent with the scientific method analyzing data. It is not a philosophically as is metaphysics or a religion.

Getting your limited knowledge of science from cut and paste youtube videos is a mistake.

How did the big bang, happen? How did a bunch of cells suddenly evolve into sapient creatures of thought, without any intelligent design? If there was none, then we would all look like a Picasso painting.

There was no big bang. There was no explosion. The Ill-named "Big Bang" refers to the expansion of universe, not a literal explosion. The idea that the universe had a beginning unique to a location (or an entity), is the remnant of an imaginative description by physicists. The so-called Big Bang was a major disruption in time and space followed by expansion of the universe.

Contrary to the indoctrination you received at your ID'iot creationer ministries, biochemistry is not a ''chance'', occurrence. It inevitably produces complex products. Amino acids and other complex molecules are even known to form in space. The major elements of life are abundant in the universe and there would be incalculable numbers of biochemical interactions occurring simultaneously.

The ramifications of the first principles of magic, supernaturalism and metaphysics tells us that ID'iot creationers will invoke magic and supernaturalism to account for their gods but that suggests a plethora of gods.

How did your gods and all the other gods come into existence? What was the first cause of the gods?

So who caused the universe in the first place then?

 

[Hollie]

Beyond the ramifications of the first principles of logic and metaphysics which absolutely tells us that God must be. . . .

There are no first principles of logic that support claims to supernaturalism.

Metaphysics may suggest anything you want because ultimately there is no requirement for the conclusions to be valid or not.

Metaphysics is the sacred cow of ID'iot creationer ministries because magic and supernaturalism is not a of science. Metaphysics is as useful as tarot card reading when introduced into the realm of science. It produces nothing of any real utility for investigating the natural world and ultimately, no requirement for 'philosophical' arguments to be true or factual.

By way of example, the Disco'tutes' definition of ID'iot creationism is ''metaphysical''. Their FAQ answering questions about ID:

"The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.''

Evolutionary theory, for one example, is a theory consistent with the scientific method analyzing data. It is not a philosophically as is metaphysics or a religion.

Getting your limited knowledge of science from cut and paste youtube videos is a mistake.

How did the big bang, happen? How did a bunch of cells suddenly evolve into sapient creatures of thought, without any intelligent design? If there was none, then we would all look like a Picasso painting.

There was no big bang. There was no explosion. The Ill-named "Big Bang" refers to the expansion of universe, not a literal explosion. The idea that the universe had a beginning unique to a location (or an entity), is the remnant of an imaginative description by physicists. The so-called Big Bang was a major disruption in time and space followed by expansion of the universe.

Contrary to the indoctrination you received at your ID'iot creationer ministries, biochemistry is not a ''chance'', occurrence. It inevitably produces complex products. Amino acids and other complex molecules are even known to form in space. The major elements of life are abundant in the universe and there would be incalculable numbers of biochemical interactions occurring simultaneously.

The ramifications of the first principles of magic, supernaturalism and metaphysics tells us that ID'iot creationers will invoke magic and supernaturalism to account for their gods but that suggests a plethora of gods.

How did your gods and all the other gods come into existence? What was the first cause of the gods?

So who caused the universe in the first place then?

I have no reason to accept any ''who'' caused the expansion.

It might have been Amun Ra. Borrowing an argument from the hyper-religious: "can you disprove it''?

 

[Ringtone]

Standard 'God of the Gaps' arguments. We don't know or can't explain it so it must have been God. The argument also assumes that if there is a creator he must be the same God as in the OT/NT. Every religion has creation myths and there is no link between the creator and God beyond some meaningless semantic argument (e.g., in English they are considered synonyms).

Standard atheist in the gaps slogan speak. The ramifications of the first principles of logic and metaphysics tell us that God must be. Science affirms that the rational forms and logical categories of human consciousness are reliable. An actual infinite does not and cannot exist. The physical world began to exist in the finite past.