/sci/ - Science & Math

Which one?

>>3286750
Any of them.

The existence of invisible unicorns cannot be proven, nor can they be disproven.

Addendum: Report'd!

Newfag here, does this board actually talk about science, or is it just a bunch of wanna-be intellectuals who can't prove their worth by anything other than bashing those who they deem to be dumb for the same reason that those that they hate find them, in fact, just as dumb.

TL;DR- fuck off.

>>3286756
What is a god?

>>3286759
For the purpose of discussion, we define a god as a supernatural being that has the power to create the universe and judge man.

>>3286760
>reporting threads

costanza.jpg

>>3286765
What is the universe?

>>3286745
God exists in the say way the voices in a schizophrenic's head exists.

>proven.

>>3286765
So he's pretty much just like any of us.
I'm pretty sure that my personal existence can be proven, thus I(God) exist.

>>3286769
Everything that's part of objective reality.

Forgot to mention that I'm an agnostic, so...

>>3286788
Does that include the schizophrenic's voices?

>>3286807
Well, I don't know any schizophrenics. If I see any, I'll let you know.

>>3286788
So God created himself then?

>>3286819
Depends on how you define God. If you use a pantheistic definition (that God is the universe), then yes.

>/sci/ rule #3 violated for the googolth time

>>3286827
But that's not what most religious believers define God as.

>>3286827
So then God is arbitrary?

>>3286841
Your opinion, not mine.

>>3286833
The mods won't delete their own threads.

>>3286844
If God created himself, and there was nothing which could exist to guide his autopoiesis, he was random.

>>3286854
Whether there's a god or not, the universe had to start with something.

>>3286827
What if I use a definition that still has an overarching effect on humanity? Does this count as god?

Igtheism: the idea that theistic debates are pointless because the term "god" is undefined.
wikipedia has more but that's the bottom line.

>>3286856
So, what definition are we referring to?

>>3286859
Whether there's a super-god or not, the god had to start with something.

>>3286859
K, everything started with everything. Howzat?

>>3286884
Exactly. Everything had to start somewhere or else there was always something the whole time.

>>3286884
Whether theres a super turtle or not, there had to be a turtle

>>3286884
If the universe can start with nothing or just exist in one form or another eternally why would God have to start?

>>3286891
And what's wrong with that?

>>3286745
And thus believing in god is stupid.

>>3286915
Lrn2logic

>>3286915
And thus arguing with atheists or theists is stupid

>>3286950

Nothing can be disproven. There is always room for doubt.

The fact that it cannot be proven should tell you how ridiculous it is.

>>3286983
X≠X
Darn, guess we should all kill ourselves now.

>>3286993
You're right, I should have mentioned maths is the exception.

>>3287022
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems
Darn, guess we should all kill ourselves now.

>>3287022
>should have identified abstract reasoning is exception.

According to my spellchecker "disproven" is not a word. Checkmate!

>the existence of invisible pink unicorns cannot be proven, nor can it be disproven

you're never called upon to prove a negative. Ann Rynd for the motherfucking win.

>>3287067
even in abstract reasoning things cant be disproven .poincare made strong points about it