Ow. That was painful to read. Do you have any idea what actually constitutes proof? Put simply, it works this way: A is proven to be true if an argument is established in which there is no way A can be false if it's supporting premises are true, and if all of these supporting premises are either also proven to be true, definitions, or trivially accepted hypotheses.
Proof is shown to you by Logic. Where does Logic come from? If you know the answer to that you'll be more logical than Socrates/Descartes/Einstein/Hawkins/etcetcetc (even Nietzche haha what did he follow to build up his own theory trying to prove God doesnt exist, he tried using Logic, the same damn thing, God = source of Logic) who in the end has to come to the logical conclusion and very live possibility (more so than the opposite where there is no 'higher entities') that Logic itself is not IN us but of a higher origin. It is was IN us we would know where it comes from, since we don't know and we don't FULLY posess it, it either means its origins are exterior and having an effect on us or that we are PART of Logic. I know what proof is. It's the principle of Zenon, to build down anothers arguments down to being laughable. Like if I say water is not watery, and you show me dead on that water is watery than it FULLY contradicts what I said. The same thing most 'atheists' say as a supposedly proof to why God doesn't exist. Can you prove me God does exist? I can ask the same equivalent question, Can you prove me in full contradiction that God doesn't exist? No? Therefore the possibility is still very much alive. What we then have to see are the facts that are in our face to demistify the reality of the world surrounding us ans using what as a guide? Logic, mathematics, which is why EVERYTHING around us is mathematical, everything, including the planets which were discovered first of all mathematically and not VISUALLY. Logic is the 3rd eye in a sense. Seeing is believing (acknowledging it's true) for the idiots who haven't used their Logic.
The interesting thing with this is that, outside of mathematics, there's absolutely no way to prove anything of any consequence. We can be extremely certain of certain things--for instance, I'm extremely certain that I'm sitting in front of a computer right now--but if you trace it back to all the supporting premises, you always hit a snag. In this case, a major snag is my perception. I can't know that I'm not hallucinating, and that I'm completely sane. It's possible--albeit unlikely--that I'm actually wearing a straight-jacket in some insane asylum, and this is all some wierd fantasy in my head.
The interesting thing is that outside of mathematics blablabla. You just fucked up. EVERYTHING is mathematical which is why there are SCIENCES. Are you the one believing in magic out of nowhere now? EVERYTHING is proven mathematically therefore there is absolutely no way outside of mathematically you can prove whatsoever. As for your 'possibilites', you're right about that, everything being mathematical around us each 'discovery' is statistical, just like 'intuitions'. 'Intuitions' are your Logic finding a lot of statistics around you and like whispering to your ear, hey look here, somethings strange there are many 'coincidences' around here, there's MAY (having more chances than elsewhere) be something interesting to be discovered here. That is science, and using Logic you find a path, slowly but surely. If you think yourself it's a whole fantasy in your head without continuing to be logical and asking Logic for answers, that's your own problem and it's a mental sickness in our world.
Alright, so while it is impossible to prove that a god exists (hey, even if I "see" him appear with my own eyes, it's still possible that I'm hallucinating, so still not proof), you still might be able to give an argument to a high likelihood that a god should exist. Let's zoom in on your argument that a god exists:
Your own eyes are a perception of the world around you, period. Just like years ago they didnt believe atoms existed, it was discovered ('fully seen') using mathematics and then telescopes with technology (using mathematics also). Just the same with quantum maths or the whole theory of relativity of Einstein, it revolutioned how we 'perceive' (with our eyes) the world us because the Logic still holds together therefore now our eyes can see atoms and things ages ago with less Logic we didn't 'know'. To know if something is TRUE, you use Logic, in other words mathematics, sciences, etc. That's no proof in itself that a God doesn't exist. In no way have you fully contradicted what I stated up to now. And even by debating wiht me, you also are using Logic to try and understand. And again I ask you so you remember, from where does that Logic come from? Ok, let's zoom in.
The existence of a 'God' (higher entities) IS proven mathematically. Just check what all astrophysicians who changed our perception of the universe around us have in comon, they see the existence of a 'God' (higher plural entities) as being completely possible and all goes in that sense.
Yes, I said that, but it's not a proof in itself, it's more like an advice like hey, why don't you look at what THEYRE saying that goes in the sense that a God (plural superior entities) DO exist. It's an advice for the wise who want to really research and not sit on their ass and in other words saying theyre the own representation of Logic therefore you don't need to research using Logic? When the wiseman points to the moon, the idiot looks at the finger.
To boil it down to argument form:
1. All "astrophysicians" (I think you mean pharmacists from space here) believe it is possible that a god or multiple gods exist.
Therefore,
2. The existence of God as being multiple entities is proven mathematically.
Frankly, this is one of the worst arguments I've ever seen. "It's possible, therefore it's true." Right. Just as it's possible that God doesn't exist, therefore that's true as well.
Now, let's go on to your argument that religion is science.
First off that's false, your first pont. I said astrophysicians, NOT pharmacists form space so you have no logical reason to tihnk that, I said what I said. Like I said, the astrophysicians who work with Logic night and day to advance what WE (as a humanity) perceive of the world around us all say that the possibility of something existing is very much alive even that with each astrophysical discovery it goes in that sense. It's for YOU to read what they're saying about it and use your own Logic to see what they mean. If they're logic in their maths, I dont see how theyre a nutcase in what they say as well. You think therefore you are. Like I said again, always research, that's what the scriptures say, always ask 'God' (in other words the origin of Logic) for your logical answers. Something you seem to be not ready to do? Before knowledge comes acceptance, always.
As for your other point, just look at all the religions (mainly logical way of lives including dieties, or in other word superior beings in the origins and now, omniscient, out of time affecting the 3D) of the world up to now, including the first of which all come from that we know of. It was polytheist, just because you call for example a grape a grape, doesn't mean a grape holds one raisin. A grape is a WHOLE, a concept of multiple things. Just like there is one God, there are also 'gods'. But that's not the only example, like I said I don't want to rewrite the whole books I suggested here. The book is there for you to read and you use your Logic to sort what is true from false. I myself am not the incarnation of Logic, everyone has that gift.
Boiled down:
1. Many religious cultures were also scientifically advanced.
Therefore,
2. Science was hand in hand with all religions.
Therefore,
3. Science and religion are the same thing.
Maybe I got misunderstood here. Look, if during all History, if in almost all religions (except the illogic ones which are themselves even following illogically what is written in the scriptures), science went hand in hand in their socities. Those societies venered their scientists and they were greatly admired and encouraged, opposite from the Vatican for example who claimed to be themselves the incarnation of Logic and forbade writing and reading for 1200 years among many other 'stupid' (illogical) things. If in a big majority of the religions science went hand in hand ( and thats INCLUDING the origin of religions as we know it today, Sumeria), that means science must've been there at the origin of what we call religion today. If you follow a way of life with a way of thought outside of science (Logic), I see NO WAY how during History science then becomes part of religion (your way of life). If you're illogic you stay illogic and even get worst just like the retarded Middle Ages in Europe. Which is why most major religions (Logical ones with real 'out of this world and time for that time' founders) then converted plenty of other people in their days seeing that calling a fire god 5 times doesnt cure sickness but a certain plant does. What makes sense (logically) always makes sense (logically) and people naturally (logically) go towards Logic (source of goodness). Which is why so many converted, if it works, IT WORKS. Therefore science was there at the beginning of religion, which is also why the medicinal knowledge, mathematics, architecture, ALL comes from those ancient days and that is was even more advanced than ours today (pyramids from America to China, Mayan Calendar for their time, Babylonian battery with electrolites, the list goes on, it's 'out of their time' but still logical to use today but still not completely). And if those Logical (in every aspect of their society) people (Sumerians, origin of all modern religion and oldest and origin of society we know of as today) themselves claimed that that knowledge they were given came from real live Gods and not themselves, I don't see how 'logically' they could of been lying.
Just for example, the zodiac constellations in space come from Sumeria which then emrged into Babylon after 6000 years. When you KNOW the Logic of the zodiac constellation (which really exist), first off you have to know that the Earth is round and not flat. To know that the Earth is round you have to fully understand the Logic (mathematics) of why the Earth is really round and is a planet in space with stars. Therefore, how can you logically explain that after several thousand years, people started believing that the Earth was flat but still kept the zodiac signs as being very 'real' if they were supposed to have themselves discovered ('fully understood') that the Earth was round in the past. What I see as a STRONG possibility, is that they were told but not fully explained bc they just simply didnt have enough Logic at that time which is why they wrote down what 'somebody' (somebodies) told them but didn't understood WHY and HOW they exist.
The same thing if for example I tell a 'magic believing' (illogical) person, don't eat that poisonous plant it'll kill you. You fully understand that that plant has toxins etc, you know all of its composition (with science) to be sure of yourself that that plant is poisonous. That other ignorant person doesnt fully understood though but trusts you nevertheless. If that same person sees someone around them go eat that plant and die. Without knowing the full Logic of the toxins inside that plant, it's still going to realize that what I had told him is true (plant is poisonous and can kill you) but by not having yourself fully understoof the Logic of the fact and discovered it yourself, it's always (and a very STRONG one too) possible for you to go into 'illogical' reasons ('God's malediction, the boogieman caught you blablabla = which just really scientifcally means a logic error occrued and killed you) added to what I said to try and explain why that plant is possible. What I said is still true, but the 'theories' (coating) surrounding WHY what I said is true can still be false. Nevertheless, if you follow Logic, with time you'll discover why what I said back then was really true. Back to the zodiac constellations for example (which is a SMALL example of what logic and smart archeologists know of the precision of their knowledge of Space including the existence of another 'inhabited' planet in our solar system with loud and clear (AND ALWAYS POSSIBLE) explanations which go in the sense that what science is discovering today. Planet X.). If the discoveries were made by those people themselves, there would be no reason as to why they (we as humanity) later fell into illogisms but still keept the 'reality' of the facts (zodiac constellations in space and seen from a round Earth).
As for the counterproof, I read it. it's bullshit. Maybe because I got misunderstood or that you yourself are illogic ut I agree that it's bullshit what you wrote in your counterprood. That's not what I'm saying at all.
Nope, sorry. Just because two things often exist simultaneously does not mean they are the same thing. In the case of religion vs. science, they in fact have existed at odds in many cases. If you look closer at the history of these religious cultures, you will see a period of scientific development, but after that, you will see a period of scientific stagnation. It is at this point that religion and science are at odds. Religion either starts to contradict scientific findings, causing those who pursue science to be condemned as heretics, or religious rules prevent certain experiments that would advance science (such as the current ban on stem-cell research).
Like I said before, the whole counterproof you wrote is bullshit (but you already know that too I supposed, it's sarcasm). Throughout history religion and science were at odds because illogic people for an illogical reason perceived both to be two separate things when in its origin science WAS religion (way of life) and the religion (way of life) WAS science (using Logic and mathematics). You know, the greatest trick the devil (source ofIllogism) ever pulled was making people believe he didn't exist and at the same time making people believe at the same time God (source of Logic) didn't exist. Why? Because it's illogic and people who are illogic truly believe (thinking it's logic) that their own illogisms are logic. You see it everyday, people who believe they are the very incarnation of Logic and that others know nothing, that is true close mindedness. I never said in History there were PERFECT religions, but almost all religions followed Logic in how they could and the scientific advances were made until they reached a certain stagnation. Just like it was before Einstein came and revolutionez everything (still Logically) and science continued to advance. Just like at how much we have advanced in the last 50 years and we are barely touching the 4th dimension (time and space, gravity, quantum maths, teleportation is very real) already. There is NOTHING perfect INSIDE Logic i in our 3D world. The perfection is ABOVE the 3rd dimension but affecting our world which is why Nature for example is all in harmony and only man (who can either go logically or illogically) can fuck up or better that balance. Religions who contradict scientific discoveries with 'magic' are wrong (the scriptures forbid magic), but just like many scientists today believe in dogmas ('magic', cemented proofs without Logic proofs) themselves. Just look at how many 'scientists' thought Copernic was a nutcase and had him burnt. Just look at Immanuel Velikovsky (who was a cloes friend of Einstein), who not only was treated like a loony also but years after his death science found out that his mathematical theories about the planet Venus WERE right. In this case, Velikovsky WAS Logic and as for the 'scientists' who judged him illogically remain illogicaly and they'll be forgotten in time. He also wrote theories almost exatcly like Stichin found separate about another planet existing but (for an unkown reason) THAT is still called loony even in all his other theories he was proven right. As for the stem-cell research, you're right, 'fundamentalism' was NEVER right (just look at how Jesus, son of 'God', in other words 'out of his time' literally, was harsh with the fundementalist that followed the Torah to the letter without using their own Logic which is where the scriptures themselves come from). But on the same note, being that we are not the origin of our origin nor of what is around you, like I said, it is ILLOGICAL to think you yourself are source of Logic therefore you are allowed to play with Nature (harmony also part of higher Logic). You have no right. You can USE Nature to your benefit and technology is just the Logical expansion for the body to perfect itself, but playing 'God' and CHANGING things in Nature is sure to fuck you up since you are part of the same world on which you play with your 'experiments'. But most people today really believe they are the source of Logic, which is why the world is getting more and more fucked up. No, it's not a coincidence. It's logical because people ARE becoming illogical.
I could go on, but it's not worth my energy. It's much easier to utter bullshit than it is to debunk it, and most of your statements aren't worth the effort of thoroughly debunking. If you wish to gain my regard as a serious intellectual contributor here rather than some wacko, please attempt to defend these points you've made here.
Oh ok, so now you also know the worth of everything and you have no time to 'waste'. Hahaha I'm sorry for you that time doesn't bend itself to you also. I am trying to defend these points, but I'm also suggesting scientific reads where their 'writers' who have (logical) credibility you can learn more. I think you're seeing me as an opponent more than anything. The one in front of you is not 'necessarily' an opponent. Remember that. There is ONE Logic, if it is good for you logically, it is good for everyone. Anyways, I pointed in the direction of where I can suggest to look for interesting scientific reads, after that, it's up to YOU to use that same Logic to see what is logically true or false. I'm not 'God' (incarnation of Logivc) even if you subconsciously may think that I am.
It's so easy falling for illogism and raising yourself your own 'Gold Calf' today and either venering it blindly or being against it blindly thinking the gold calf is the real explanation. Everybody seems to be doing, it's the newest trend in town..
Poll