If we can't see an atom or a god, how do we 'prove' or 'disprove' these things exist, and do we even need proof?

[Procrustes Stretched]

If we can't see an atom or a god, how do we 'prove' or 'disprove' these things exist, and do we even need proof? Why would proof be needed or desired? If we do a thorough investigation seeking evidence of the atom and of a god, where will we find ourselves?

So far:

The atom:

Chapter 1: The Invisible Soccer Ball

" This book is devoted to one problem.... what are the ultimate building blocks of matter? " -pg 2 The beginning of the universe is just a ...

higgsscalarbosonparticle.blogspot.com

A god:
EMPTY - MPTY - MPT - MT - ___________________

Is this correct? If not, what am I missing? What scientific proof is there of a god existing?

 

[Crepitus]

If we can't see an atom or a god, how do we 'prove' or 'disprove' these things exist, and do we even need proof? Why would proof be needed or desired? If we do a thorough investigation seeking evidence of the atom and of a god, where will we find ourselves?

So far:

The atom:

Chapter 1: The Invisible Soccer Ball

" This book is devoted to one problem.... what are the ultimate building blocks of matter? " -pg 2 The beginning of the universe is just a ...

higgsscalarbosonparticle.blogspot.com

A god:
EMPTY - MPTY - MPT - MT - ___________________

Is this correct? If not, what am I missing? What scientific proof is there of a god existing?

We can "see" an atom. Just not with our naked eyes.

I've yet to see a "god detector".

 

[Donald H]

Americans can believe what they like to believe, at their own peril.

For Christians, the Catholic church has offered a break through from strictly creationist theory, by embracing Darwinian evolution!

 

[luiza]

Someone else who clearly does not know how to use Inference in probability terms , or , understands the role played by the Bradford Hill Criteria in scientifically examining links between correlation and causation .

It is only comparatively recently that we have become involved in probability as an explanation for matters and most people still imagine that the only simple acceptable full link to effect, is the only way to produce facts --- in simple terms by using Newtonian Physics .

Very old hat .

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

We can "see" an atom. Just not with our naked eyes.

I've yet to see a "god detector".

On seeing atoms - UND Today

‘Impossible,’ physicists once said, when asked whether people ever could see atoms. Today, physicist Nuri Oncel would answer, ‘Very possible indeed’

blogs.und.edu

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Americans can believe what they like to believe, at their own peril.

For Christians, the Catholic church has offered a break through from strictly creationist theory, by embracing Darwinian evolution!

The Roman Catholic Church is a joke.

 

[Crepitus]

The Roman Catholic Church is a joke.

More of a shelter for child abusers.

 

[petro]

If we can't see an atom or a god, how do we 'prove' or 'disprove' these things exist, and do we even need proof? Why would proof be needed or desired? If we do a thorough investigation seeking evidence of the atom and of a god, where will we find ourselves?

So far:

The atom:

Chapter 1: The Invisible Soccer Ball

" This book is devoted to one problem.... what are the ultimate building blocks of matter? " -pg 2 The beginning of the universe is just a ...

higgsscalarbosonparticle.blogspot.com

A god:
EMPTY - MPTY - MPT - MT - ___________________

Is this correct? If not, what am I missing? What scientific proof is there of a god existing?

Define seeing.

No evidence either way though, of whether just a random occurrence or higher intelligence.

Not out of the realm of possibility that much higher intelligence exists far beyond the scope of human understanding.
If we are it for advancement of life, the natural order better get its shit together.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Define seeing.

No evidence either way though, of whether just a random occurrence or higher intelligence.

Not out of the realm of possibility that much higher intelligence exists far beyond the scope of human understanding.
If we are it for advancement of life, the natural order better get its shit together.

On seeing atoms - UND Today

‘Impossible,’ physicists once said, when asked whether people ever could see atoms. Today, physicist Nuri Oncel would answer, ‘Very possible indeed’

blogs.und.edu

possibilities vs probabilities: you are confused.

 

[Donald H]

The Roman Catholic Church is a joke.

But they're first with an explanation, when all churches are going to need a damage control explanation soon.

And they're so big in numbers that they will cause the others to start thinking about the impossibility of the bible stories.

It's not likely that the CC would have gambled everything on evolution unless they knew it needed to come.

 

[alang1216]

If we can't see an atom or a god, how do we 'prove' or 'disprove' these things exist, and do we even need proof? Why would proof be needed or desired? If we do a thorough investigation seeking evidence of the atom and of a god, where will we find ourselves?

Actually, we can see atoms using Scanning Tunneling Microscopy.

God is a human concept that can't be seen.

 

[Esdraelon]

We can "see" an atom. Just not with our naked eyes.

I've yet to see a "god detector".

Hang around, you're living in precisely the right time to get a look.

 

[Woodznutz]

It's probably more important that we believe in divine creation at this time in history. Science can't save us from ourselves, religion has a better chance. Asking science (human reasoning) to solve our problems is asking the fox to guard the henhouse.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

And they're so big in numbers that they will cause the others to start thinking about the impossibility of the bible stories.

Wrong.

 

[DukeU]

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

It's probably more important that we believe in divine creation at this time in history. Science can't save us from ourselves, religion has a better chance. Asking science (human reasoning) to solve our problems is asking the fox to guard the henhouse.

Really? I guess you fail history.

No one is claiming that science exists to save anything. You frame things in ways that then gives you the answers you seek.

Beliefs in 'Divine creation' are infantile. People can be spiritual without believing in divine creation. There is no need to believe that shit, except childish fears of life/existence.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Actually, we can see atoms using Scanning Tunneling Microscopy.

God is a human concept that can't be seen.

Imaging? Okay.

 

[ReinyDays]

From the science angle ... we only model atoms with discreet components ... protons, electrons and such ... but in reality they're more like waves than particles ... it's just useful to think of atoms as chunks of matter ... especially in chemistry ... and biology ...

Unfortunately ... science doesn't define "good" and "evil" ... or "God" and "Satan" ... that's left for the philosopher ...

 

[Donald H]

Sperms were brought to earth from another planet to seed the earth, etc. ...........

Amusing theory to stand against the CC's acceptance of evolution!

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The End Times Kooks.


Love this one: Like you, he's all over the place. Struggling, Confused...

What is Thomas Sowell's philosophy?

His views are described as conservative, especially on social issues; libertarian, especially on economics; or libertarian-conservative. He has said he may be best labelled as a libertarian, though he disagrees with libertarians on some issues, such as national defense.