[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]

2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

File: 1.43 MB, 2016x3024, MichioKakuHD2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Sat Jul 17 23:09:54 2010 No.1427279 [Reply] [Original]

Atheists, if god existed, then how would you be able to prove it?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 17 23:11:54 2010 No.1427300 Oh shut up Kaku, you're full of shit!

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 17 23:11:54 2010 No.1427290 Well that would depend upon the nature of that god. The presence of some, ahem, gods can be proven much easier than others.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 17 23:11:54 2010 No.1427304 Well, he could start by appearing materially and identifying himself as such. Also, do a few things that violate the laws of physics in order to prove that he wasn't an impostor.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 17 23:12:54 2010 No.1427305 >>1427279 totally read in his voice

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 17 23:12:54 2010 No.1427311 You've answered your own question, OP. Michio Kaku's existence is proof there is no god.

>>	UnAnon !!28hxH7gt+Dx Sat Jul 17 23:13:54 2010 No.1427317 >>1427279 Start with Afrika.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 17 23:14:54 2010 No.1427327 >>1427304 >do a few things that violate the laws of physics Create a black-hole or show us what's inside?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 17 23:21:54 2010 No.1427369 >>1427327 Well, I suppose that would work, but I was thinking of something more along the lines of generating matter or energy out of nothingness.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 17 23:25:54 2010 No.1427399 >>1427279 So long there is logic, there will be no way to prove anything. Ironic no?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 17 23:28:54 2010 No.1427414 >>1427300 NO U.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 17 23:29:54 2010 No.1427427 Through the intricate systems that naturally occur everywhere throughout the universe. Science is evidence for god, IMHO.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 17 23:31:54 2010 No.1427446 >>1427427 Because?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 17 23:32:54 2010 No.1427452 >>1427427 Presuppositional apologist detected

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 17 23:45:54 2010 No.1427520 If God exists and can do anything, he could make us all believe. What better proof that you can do anything, than to us your magic to make them believe you.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 17 23:51:54 2010 No.1427572 By observing his effects on the material universe.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 18 00:03:54 2010 No.1427654 By asking you to prove your lie, if you prove that your lie is the truth then I have nothing more to say

>>	Oil? What Oil? Sun Jul 18 00:05:54 2010 No.1427672 tell ya what, when the clouds part in golden radiance, and a sparkly white dude wth long hair walks down to earth on thin air, I'll be with ya

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 18 00:07:54 2010 No.1427683 >>1427672 Agreed >>1427654 Makes sense

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 18 00:38:54 2010 No.1427889 well, first, how tall is god, exactly?

Carlos !tySktv67Gw Sun Jul 18 00:42:54 2010 No.1427913

God is kind of a vague term so Im going to assume your talking about some sort of Creator god and not just some very powerful entity.

If the entity were to make his presence known and demonstrate his ability to create matter or energy from nothing that would prove the existence of a creator god.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 18 01:34:54 2010 No.1428280 >>1427279 Give me all the fucking grant money I want, and I'll call anyone god.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 18 01:36:54 2010 No.1428294 >>1427369 umm our universe?

Caffeine !jULYrApEWY Sun Jul 18 01:41:54 2010 No.1428322
File: 124 KB, 400x400, PhilosoraptorAtheism.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>1427399
Enjoyed. Pic related, made for a zealous atheist friend that constantly attempts to pick fights with religious people.

>>1427520

>Implying you understand the hypothetical decisions of a god.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 18 01:45:54 2010 No.1428343 File: 147 KB, 600x750, 1277842538659.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1428322 Great idea! Lets make up shit that cant be disproven! We will call it religion!

Anonymous Sun Jul 18 01:46:54 2010 No.1428348

The simplest way would be through direct relevation, followed by a series of controlled experiments. This could easily verify the existence of an extremely intelligent super-being capable of creating and altering matter with its will. Technically you could not prove literal omnipotence (unless you have a literally infinitely difficult creation task), but it would lend a lot more credibility to the claim.

Caffeine !jULYrApEWY Sun Jul 18 01:48:54 2010 No.1428364

>>1428343
I think you missed the point. I'm not saying religions are correct, because the existence of a god cannot be proven.

What I'm saying is that devout atheism is just as intellectually barren as devout religion. Admission of a lack of knowledge is really the only intelligent option.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 18 01:49:54 2010 No.1428370 File: 56 KB, 800x375, 1262755616260.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] You are all the cancer killing /sci/. You, magnets, math problems, and tiers of science.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 18 01:50:54 2010 No.1428380 >>1428370 My religion says that magnets cause cancer, and thus physicists should be shit-tier scientists because they can't even use them to make rockets fly.

burden of proof hello Sun Jul 18 01:55:54 2010 No.1428414

"what is atheism for being unable to prove god doesen't"

this isn't a valid argument.. you should read up on "Burden of proof"

in a nutshell, the problem for the Theists is that THEY are making the positive claim about God, therefore they must prove the claim, it's not the responsibility to the Atheist to UNprove the claim

here's a link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof

>>	sage sage Sun Jul 18 01:55:54 2010 No.1428416 File: 32 KB, 446x373, retardn001w.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >devout atheism is just as intellectually barren as devout religion You can't be that stupid? Can you? 0/10

Caffeine !jULYrApEWY Sun Jul 18 02:09:54 2010 No.1428519

>>1428414

Reread and observe that stating something does not exist also has the burden of proof, though by this theory a less substantial burden.

However, when considering that a firm belief in either position is easily questioned "Is this true?", neither position can claim that they have proven their opinion true. This makes anyone with a full, devout commitment to either belief less than 100% right.

The key to the concept in this case is that you're not arguing someone who is saying faeries DO exist. You're arguing against someone who says they don't know.

>>1428416

Think it through kiddo, you'll get the concept one day.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 18 02:12:54 2010 No.1428537 /sci/ pretends God exists. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::)

Anonymous Sun Jul 18 02:32:54 2010 No.1428680

It would be easy for an all powerful god to step in and prove himself to exist. The fact that no god had yet to do that makes me feel like there really is no god. As far as burden of proof. Try to disprove that there are invisible leprechauns that can walk thru walls and watch you while you sleep. Nobody can disprove it but you'd have to be an idiot to believe it. Same with god.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 18 02:36:54 2010 No.1428703 File: 36 KB, 275x203, buford_t_justice.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] I know this is a troll thread, but I think its brilliance comes from the way it is clumsily (but deliberately?) worded.

Caffeine !jULYrApEWY Sun Jul 18 02:42:54 2010 No.1428757

>>1428680

You'd be an idiot to say "There are certainly invisible leprechauns."
You'd also be an idiot to say "There are certainly NOT invisible leprechauns."
Agnosticism is choice C, saying you do not certainly know either way.

An agnostic can easily be of the opinion that it is likely or it is unlikely for a god to exist. Refusal to admit the uncertainty is the display of ignorance, not the favor of likelihood in either direction.

Anonimouse Sun Jul 18 02:51:54 2010 No.1428818

>>1428757

>You'd be an idiot to say "There are certainly invisible leprechauns."
>You'd also be an idiot to say "There are certainly NOT invisible leprechauns."

No you would not be an idiot to say "There are certainly NOT invisible leprechauns." You have looked for signs of them, you found no signs of them. It is quite clear that there is no reason to believe that there exist invisible leprechauns. There is good reason to believe that they were made up. I know there are none to the same extent that I know there is no teapot orbiting Saturn. By your description, the idea of "knowing" is meaningless. I prefer to use the word "know" to describe that which has been tested in many ways and shown to be the case.

AnonymousG Sun Jul 18 03:18:54 2010 No.1429014

>>1428818

That's fine, but his definition/idea of "know" is quite common in epistemology. And you're right: How can you know anything about the world outside your mind?

(Hint: You can't. You can have sufficient reason to believe it, but you'll never know it's true with certainty.)

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 18 03:23:54 2010 No.1429030 >>1427311 >>1427311 >>1427311 >>1427311

>>	woodydies Sun Jul 18 03:25:54 2010 No.1429043 trick question, michio kaku is actually god

Anonimouse Sun Jul 18 03:27:54 2010 No.1429052

>>1429014
Find me a person who denies reality, and I'll show you a person who is delusional. Besides, our minds are so loose weave, and our memories are so mailable that I find your notion that we can only 'now things within our heads, and nothing about the outside world's true nature', rather mad. Are you implying that the world is weaving itself around you to trick you into believing that an objective reality exists, and that you in fact you are a perfectly rational being with a non-fallible mind?

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 18 04:00:54 2010 No.1429187 >delusional Overused to the point of becoming meaningless.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]