Is There Any Evidence for the Existence of God?

The universe is not fine tuned for life, or anything like that. You can remove one of the fundamental forces completely, the weak nuclear force, and life would still be possible as we know it. The other values can also be messed with and allow life as we know it.

Creationists should educate themselves on actual science, not their version of science.

The god of the gaps argument is not an argument at all. The same logic can be used to say a piece of fruit created the universe.

 

You didn't understand the webpage.

They are not creationists.

Actually the argument is the opposite of a "god of the gaps" argument. According to the webpage God isn't sprinkled on top of the universe, he's baked right in.

 

Sorry, the universe is not fine tuned in any way that says a god exists.

 

Saying that God is the Universe is also pointless. We have a word for that thing already.

 

Since no one knows what the universe is it's silly to think that it's unique. I look at it like this. Suppose you are driving down the road and see patches of dandelions down the medians and in the yards and fields. Each dandelion represents a galaxy and each patch represents a different universe. So there could be more universes than there are estimated stars in our observable universe. And all of those universes, regardless of size, are just a very infinitesimal part of the whole of what is, sort of like a single hydrogen atom compared to our known universe.

 

There does seem to be a lot of uniformity and observable events not explained by chaos.

It seems to me some people have a very under developed idea of God while others have a seriously over developed sense of science. Both are guilty of bizarre extrapolations and both believe their track is the correct one.

 

Yes, our present space-time universe had a beginning, but assuming some unknown "God" was responsible for it is a convenient copout.
We know quite a bit about the Big Bang and Black Holes by now, no need to postulate any god for which there is no evidence.

 

What is the most significant discovery in the BBT?

 

Indeed some do. Some of us do not allow our imaginations to run wild.

 

Background microwave radiation and red shifted galaxies.

 

And you have strayed into God of the Gaps.

 

I don't think so......

 

Is There Any Evidence for the Existence of God?

Yes.

The infinite and profound universe around us.

 

No, that's evidence that there is a universe out there.

 

No it isn't. We perceive the universe through our senses that are translated through our brains. For all we know, everything we can sense is nothing but an illusion because our brain cannot independently verify the information sent through electrical signals via senses.

 

I didn't say proof.

 

You said evidence. Aside from whacky semantic games, it is the same as proof.

 

Because we all have the same sense-organs then we are likely to perceive our environment in the same manner. But what we think we see, feel, smell, hear might not actually be what we think it is. How can we be sure of anything?

BTW evidence isn't the same as proof. One is a brick, the other is a wall of bricks.

 

Each of us has a unique experience of existence and perception not fully shared with any other person. This helps show all we have are perceptions as there is no room for an objective view freeing us from ourselves while entering others.


e·vi·dence
[ev -i-duhns]
- noun
1. something establishing a fact as true

proof
[proof]
- noun
1. evidence establishing a truth or fact

 

We share enough common experiences with each other to enable us to live together. If we didn't we'd have died out long ago. But each of us has our own, individual perception and understanding, for sure. Because we use our human senses (and assuming that they operate more or less the same for each of us, allowing for some senses that may not operate as intended) we can share perception. Because we have the ability to communicate (as humans I mean) we can discuss our shared perceptions. Some of our perceptions are shared culturally, some are physical, some are no doubt metaphysical understandings, or at least agreed situations and hypotheses. All this goes back to Descartes doesn't it?

Evidence and proof. Don't worry about word definitions, look to reality. Someone running a criminal investigation looks for evidence of the crime. Evidence can be real, such as objects; it can also be testimonial, such as eyewitness evidence. Evidence can be used to allow inference. This tool has striations on it, the striations match the striations found on the frame of a window in which an offender broke in and stole property. When the evidence is gathered and presented to a court, the court, by this process of inference, considers if there is sufficient amount and quality of evidence that reaches the criminal standard of proof - "beyond a reasonable doubt".

As I said, evidence is a brick or bricks, proof is a wall made up of those bricks.

 

In science, which is all that counts, evidence only supports something, doesn't prove.

 

e·vi·dence
[ev -i-duhns]
- noun
1. something establishing a fact as true

proof
[proof]
- noun
1. evidence establishing a truth or fact

 

Like I said, whacky semantics.

 

Perhaps evidence as understood in science is more relevant than a single line definition from a popular dictionary, when discussing evidence in science? lol

 

Is that from a scientific dictionary? Science doesn't use proof.