Is Memory the Key to Disproving the Existence of God?

  • Thread starter DeadWolfe
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Proof
In summary, the proof that there is no god concludes that god is a product of information and is not all-powerful or all knowing.
  • #71
Why do you all seek for hell?

God exists, believe it or not. It isn't the universe which is a God. But mind it that there is a supernatural being which controls the universe and the happenings in it. Ok, can you just tell who created the universe, obviously i'll have an answer that it was coincidently made. Scientist believe that the universe was created by some kind of big bang, if yes then how did the collision happen, and from where did the collided particles came from. All the strange questions lead everyone to reach to the answer that there is a supernatural being who did all this and made it happen. :mad:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #72
Oh my ****... Someone shoot Razi Abid...

All the strange questions lead everyone to reach to the answer that there is a supernatural being who did all this and made it happen.

...All of the questions do not lead to the answer of some supernatural being, ****tard..

If i felt like typing out that huge ass portion from Hyperspace, I would... But I don't feel like typing it all out, so buy the book and read pages 191 to 214...
 
  • #73
Oh.. and give me Logical proof OF God.. And I'll buy the religion ****...
 
  • #74
modmans2ndcoming said:
ahem...with all due respect, I can point you to something that holds information without needing memory...

the universe. it has no memory, but it holds lots and lots of structured meaningful information.

And god or no god, it went through a creation. Not helping your case.
 
  • #75
Razi Abid said:
Can you just tell who created the universe, obviously i'll have an answer that it was coincidently made. Scientist believe that the universe was created by some kind of big bang, if yes then how did the collision happen, and from where did the collided particles came from?
If anyone gives a logical answer to this question, then i will definately stop believing in GOD. This will be a hard task for me as I solely believe in ONE GOD.
______________________________________________________________
Make me stop believing in God, i bet no one can.
 
  • #76
The Big Bang could have come from branes colliding, or it could have come from a quantum fluctualtion - the "free lunch" proposal, or it could have come about in some other way.

But just because science doesn't have an explicit answer for this doesn't mean you are logically justified in concluding that a personal god made the universe. This is like asking what color is grandpa's house? And if you get the answer "I don't know", saying "Well then it must be pink with purple polka-dots."
 
  • #77
Razi Abid said:
If anyone gives a logical answer to this question, then i will definately stop believing in GOD. This will be a hard task for me as I solely believe in ONE GOD.
______________________________________________________________
Make me stop believing in God, i bet no one can.

Your question says tell me who created the universe and then i will stop believing in God.

I can't tell you who created it if there was no being to create it, there is no way to respond to that question and make a convincing case that doesn't agree with you in the same breath so to speak.
 
  • #78
Reply

So you all mean to say that the creation of the universe was just a scientific mistake, and that the extra genious civilised beings, who are so called humans, were all born by mistake.Don't you wonder that all the creation wasn't by mistake or coincidence, but was pre-planned by God.
Please don't seek for hell, just establish a firm belief in God. :mad:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #79
What mistake? To have a mistake you have to have a plan. The alternative view is that there was no plan. You are just so wound up with your theological view that you can't even perceive a non-theological view. But they exist, and in spite of your opinion, they are not nasty.
 
  • #80
Reply to SelfAdjoint

Look, you are talking very illogical. Can you please give me about five reasons to prove that God doesn't exists.
 
  • #81
Razi Abid said:
Look, you are talking very illogical. Can you please give me about five reasons to prove that God doesn't exists.
How about if you give one good reason to prove why 'he' does ?

[edit]
Oops, sorry I just read the title of this thread. Nevermind responding, Razi Abid.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #82
All of you are missing something crucial

modmans2ndcoming said:
if that is the case, then the universe cannot possible exist since memory must have existed before the universe, except, before the universe is a meaningless term since until the universe formed, there was no before. since there was no before, then memory could not have been in existence to make the universe and as such, the universe could not form. :smile:

We can never get anywhere in the discussions which god or universe is traced back in TIME.you have to know that time is just one of the dimensions like space and other.so when the universe or matter was created so was time,at that very instant.Even space was created and is being continuously being created.thats is why objects in the universe are moving further apart.Its proved experimentally.
Comments Welcome!
 
Last edited:
  • #83
reply to boulder head

look boulder head, if you concentrate on the systamatic way the nature works then you'll be bound to think that this just cannot happen by itself.
CONCENTRATE ON NATURE AND ITS EXISTENCE :smile:
 
  • #84
If any of you had read Dr. Kaku's Carp analogy, you would realize that that can relate to us, like the carp were un-able to fathom up, we can't fathom the existence of a God, or even that fact that he was always there, and never was born and that he created time and there was no time before that, so if there is no time how did things come to pass? and things such as that. Just as if the carp scientist would be deemed crazy to asume such things happen above the water ( yet those things do exist), you deem people who believe in an omni-potent being (or the rain effecting our universe), crazy!. Even though there actually is one.

Our minds can't grasp this concept, just like the carp have no concept of up, we have no concept of God.

God is pulling those strings...
 
Last edited:
  • #85
selfAdjoint said:
What mistake? To have a mistake you have to have a plan. The alternative view is that there was no plan. You are just so wound up with your theological view that you can't even perceive a non-theological view. But they exist, and in spite of your opinion, they are not nasty.


and you are so wound up with your scientific view that you can't even percieve a non-evolutionistic view. One takes belief, and the other takes hard evidence, that happens to be taken in an extremely unaccurate way that gives extremely unaccurate results (carbon dating), and scientific "guesses" made by men that are in reality scared to admit that there is a God because that makes humankind "inferior".

That is the reason why scientists have not liked the idea of God. It is too complex an idea for the scientific lab. They can't handle the fact that there is something that is inexplicable from the human scientific understanding. What happens when something is unexplicable? Scientists attack it until they discover when, how,and why it works. They can't do this with God so, they are intimidated when confronted with God. I've seen it. They are not quick to dispute it because it is false, no, they are quick to dispute it because they can't scientifically explain it. Therefore, they get defensive.
 
  • #86
shadowman said:
One takes belief, and the other takes hard evidence

If your saying there is Hard-evidence for Evolutiont then your wrong, a lot of the evidence has been turned up false, even Darwin said at the end of his life that what he wrote was a load of bull. And Comparitive Embryology was rejected by ALL the evolutionists at the time and it was proved wrong! Yet you can open a science book and it will still have that in there!

The guy who invented the Classing system eg. Phylum and all that ( i can't remember his name) was a christian creationist, yet the evolutionists used it to prove evolution.

Though micro evolution has been proven (which i believe happens) macro evolution hasn't been proved, they got a lizards leg and somthing elses leg and said look they look similar but they have never found the "lizard thingy" which is half way inbetween or even the stages inbetween that!. We had to do a debate in our school on Evolution Vs Creation and the creationists won you know why? The people looking for prove for Evolutionism couldn't find any, that wasn't already dis-proved by creationism.
 
  • #87
Gelsamel Epsilon said:
If your saying there is Hard-evidence for Evolutiont then your wrong, a lot of the evidence has been turned up false.


I know this... that's what I was saying. carbod dating is an inaccurate way to date things, but it is still used, etc. what I was trying to convey in my reply was that modern scientists run from God. The "hard evidence" is wrong. I said hard evidence because that is what they think they have.
 
  • #88
Ok, so we don't have perfect evidence for our many theories of the birth of the universe. But how much hard evidence do you have for the existence of God? None. All you say is oh we have faith, that's all we need, and do you think scientists don't have faith? Sure they do. But their's is at least that the latest theories will prove some things, and not 'we have faith that something is there despite a complete lack of evidence in any shape or form'. Where is your CMB for God? Your Higgs for the 'great one'? The only form of evidence creationists conjure up are from the mishaps of science - where science has made a mistake. You don't use your own evidence, you just twist scientifical evidence to make it sound like you do. You are cynics towards science (the real world) and you have been brainwashed i am afraid. And don't reply saying that scientists have been brainwashed. Because they haven't. Scientists base their assumptions and estimates on true evidence, creationists base theirs on the fact that a holy book told them, and lots and lots and lots of people believe it so it must be true - and now i am going to heaven.

Open your eyes, and take a look at reality - real space, real time, real evidence, Science.

K_
 
  • #89
actually there are constantly being discoveries made that only the christian bible can explain - i.e. several years back group of archeologists found a set of scrolls - they later found out only way to explain them was that they were the scrolls of the red sea or sommit - which is mentioned in the bible and would explain how they got to where they were found
 
  • #90
Razi Abid said:
So you all mean to say that the creation of the universe was just a scientific mistake, and that the extra genious civilised beings, who are so called humans, were all born by mistake.Don't you wonder that all the creation wasn't by mistake or coincidence, but was pre-planned by God.
Please don't seek for hell, just establish a firm belief in God. :mad:


Firstly: I don't need to seek for hell, I'm already living there. But my hatred of ym existence is not the issue here.

I would argue humans are not "extra genious" and for the vast majority are not even rational.

No i don't wonder.

A mistake implies that there was some other purpose in mind. Your very diction indicates that you will never be swayed, you cannot form a sentence without showing that you believe in God and the rest of us are wrong. I don't believe my existence is a mistake (birth control jokes aside) because i do not believe that there was any supernatural being to make such a mistake. My existence simply is, it is the result of a long serious of natural, chemical processes. Nothing more, nothing less.
 
  • #91
TsunamiJoe said:
actually there are constantly being discoveries made that only the christian bible can explain - i.e. several years back group of archeologists found a set of scrolls - they later found out only way to explain them was that they were the scrolls of the red sea or sommit - which is mentioned in the bible and would explain how they got to where they were found


Finding archeological evidence that Sodom and Gomorrah is a little bit different than finding archeological evidence of God coming down and taking the prohpet away in "a chariot of fire".

Show me that, then i'll be convinced by archeology.
 
  • #92
Its Fairly Obvious no one is going to change anyone's minds here.

Though it one thing has been proven in the bible i think its safe to assume that the rest is true.

Anyway, what's wrong living a morally correct life?
 
  • #93
Dumb Asses

Razi Abid said:
Look, you are talking very illogical. Can you please give me about five reasons to prove that God doesn't exists.


Jesus Christ! Jumping Jehova! I can't believe this "discussion" is happening here. There is obviously no way one can prove or disprove the existence of something outside of nature (supernatural beings like gods and devils) through "logic" or otherwise. So there is no way that you would EVER know whether something like that exists.

I don't know what any of your professions are, but any of you taking one side or another cannot honestly call himself a scientist (or even a rational thinker).

I'm just a poster on this board, but can someone please direct this crap to some other forum?? :mad:
 
  • #94
Gelsamel Epsilon said:
Its Fairly Obvious no one is going to change anyone's minds here.

Though it one thing has been proven in the bible i think its safe to assume that the rest is true.

Statement ONE: The smartest thing said on this thread.

Statement TWO: The absolute stupidest thing I've seen in this forum.
:mad:
 
  • #95
See what I mean?
 
  • #96
oh no

What do you mean, if one thing in the bible is true then the rest is true? so you are also saying then, if this applies to other theories, that because we have discovered the proton, then the universe started in a big bang, white holes exist, the higgs boson doesn't need searching for because it definitely exists. You have just thrown your own argument out of the window. Well done, another illogical statement from a creationist. Oh well.

K_ :grumpy:
 
  • #97
felipefas said:
Are you all trying to play God?. The meaning of God is what is in question. Not the definition. God as an idea was created to represent the creator of things we cannot understand. The moment we learn how anything works, it is not an event made by God anymore but the result of some force that must be created by God. In other words, God by definition is the creator of anything we are too ignorant to know yet. Trying to explaing God or attribute any characteristics (!memory!, PLEASE) is putting him in a level with us or below us. He automatically stops being God. If you would ever want to get an insight on God. Try a human psychology course.

Nnnnnnnnnnnnnice to meat you, God.
 
  • #98
I actually ment my first statement :-/ I meant "See no-one will change anyones minds"

And i didn't mean it like that. The Big Bang could of been created by God for all you know!. And I am not a creationist. And its not only 1 thing in the bible.

Creation: Most things proven, all attacks by evolutionists repelled, no mistakes made.

Evolution: Most things "proven", then distroyed by other EVOLUTIONISTS! or Creationists. Millions of Mistakes made, yet those mistakes still taught to the youth.

People don't want to believe in Creation becuase its hard to comprehend, hence them beliving evolution. Even though creation still has more proof then Evolution. Society wants to believe that Humans are the most omni-potent "race" or thing, they don't like to think of themself as lower then somthing else.

Even those strata ( i think they r called that) layers in the rock, have been proven to be able to form quickly in a horisontal pattern rather then slowly over millions of years laid down from top to bottom.

Give me some evidence that I cannot refute and I will become a evolutionist.
 
  • #99
God is the purest form of energy from which everything springs, His memory is in the DNA of the living and the 22 quantum particles that form the base of all matter.
 
  • #100
now even i find that ridiculous..
 
  • #101
Gelsamel Epsilon said:
Creation: Most things proven, all attacks by evolutionists repelled, no mistakes made.

Excuse me but am i missing something? Most things are proven for your view of creation ( i assume you are referring to genesis in the bible?)
:confused:
 
  • #102
Even those strata ( i think they r called that) layers in the rock, have been proven to be able to form quickly in a horisontal pattern rather then slowly over millions of years laid down from top to bottom. - Gelsamel

Would you kindly provide a link to a site that tells more about that? And are you saying that all strata were formed quickly, or just that some of them were?
 
  • #103
Hello fellow scientist! There is actuallly proof of the christian bible. First of all the book of jobe where God talks about dinasours..ok that's not really a good one. But in the book of enoch, for those who don't know it predates Jesus by about 6 thousand years...talks about how the universe is structured and how the moon orbits the Earth and the Earth orbits the sun and other complicated details of the universe. And not to mention that Isac Newton used the bible to help him in his mathmatical and astronomical persutes. And then the book of jobe talks about vents in the deep sea that let out hot gas and lave...and the scientific community found this out when you ask...only in the late 19th century.
 
  • #104
Alem2000, I am not familiar with Enoch. If it predates Jesus by 6,000 years, that would make it, at 8,000 years, far older than any other document we have, wouldn't it? I find that implausible. Do you have some supporting references you can give us?
 
  • #105
Just for those who don't know Enoch was the 7th son of Adam. Okay here is the link to the 3rd part of the book of enoch which talks about the sun and Earth and stars. Try to keep in mind that at that time even knowing that the Earth is a sphere is a discovery itself. If you read carefully past the coded words you can see that it talks about ligh as a wave, and orbits of the moon. Let me know what you think. http://www.piney.com/Apoc3Astronomy.html By the way this book was ruled out of the bible for some theological reason.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
3
Replies
70
Views
12K
  • Science Fiction and Fantasy Media
2
Replies
51
Views
8K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Science Fiction and Fantasy Media
2
Replies
61
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
912
Back
Top