This fucking thread.

These fucking people.

Holy shit.

Dustin, fuck off.

Noelle, Google epistemology.

BC, the absence of evidence can in fact be evidence of absence, which while not actually "proving" that God doesn't exist makes the godless model the more substantiated. . .for now.

Jim, stop being a reverse fedora tipper.

NOW SHADDUP

suk my wiener UglyPenisrahna

noufgt

Quote from: SexyPiranha on November 01, 2014, 01:14:45 PM

Quote from: Jimjob the Jam Lorde on November 01, 2014, 01:10:50 PM

suk my wiener UglyPenisrahna

noufgt

How many thousands of years have we had time to come up with a model that could explain, within the bounds of the laws of physics, how the universe could come to be? I think we've had plenty of time to come up with something. If there simply is no model, then we can only assume it is a supernatural act that made the universe. If you are an atheist, you must agree the laws of physics are faulty. And by that reasoning, you are unscientific and inexplicably wrong.

Here are your choices broken down:

1. The laws of physics are wrong
2. A supernatural act occurred

To go with option one is rather ignorant and unscientific. Any successful atheist scientists are simply in denial, are reserved in their talents to reason to just their skilled profession. God must be real.

> thousands of years
Actually physics has only been around for 500 or so years. Cosmology only became a science last century even now it's not exact.

Are you implying the fact that we don't have a complete theory of reality means that God must exist(not that I think we ever will)? Are you retarded? God of the gaps much? When Isaac Newton couldn't figure out how his inverse square law of gravity could explain the movement of more than a couple of bodies he assumed god must be responsible, he was wrong. This is the same thing, you wanna try again?

Actually no, this is even worse than God of the gaps. If I were to have a complete theory of reality I could prove once and for whether or not god exists. In saying an absence of such a theory proves god's existence you are essentially saying, "I can't prove god does or does not exist, therefor god exists."

Dustbin, pls.

Quote from: SexyPiranha on November 01, 2014, 01:30:34 PM

Quote from: DustinWillProveGodReal on November 01, 2014, 01:17:27 PM

Quote from: SexyPiranha on November 01, 2014, 01:14:45 PM

Quote from: Jimjob the Jam Lorde on November 01, 2014, 01:10:50 PM

suk my wiener UglyPenisrahna

noufgt

How many thousands of years have we had time to come up with a model that could explain, within the bounds of the laws of physics, how the universe could come to be? I think we've had plenty of time to come up with something. If there simply is no model, then we can only assume it is a supernatural act that made the universe. If you are an atheist, you must agree the laws of physics are faulty. And by that reasoning, you are unscientific and inexplicably wrong.

Here are your choices broken down:

1. The laws of physics are wrong
2. A supernatural act occurred

To go with option one is rather ignorant and unscientific. Any successful atheist scientists are simply in denial, are reserved in their talents to reason to just their skilled profession. God must be real.

> thousands of years
Actually physics has only been around for 500 or so years. Cosmology only became a science last century even now it's not exact.

Are you implying the fact that we don't have a complete theory of reality means that God must exist(not that I think that's possible, ever heard of Godel's incompleteness theorem)? Are you retarded? God of the gaps much? When Isaac Newton couldn't figure out how his inverse square law of gravity could explain the movement of more than a couple of bodies he assumed god must be responsible, he was wrong. This is the same thing, you wanna try again?

That's still dodging the question. If the universe's creation happened naturally, why can't it be explained? You don't even need math or measurements to answer the question why we have something rather than nothing.  A God is the only thing that could do that, and thus by process of elimination we have proved His existence.

 In saying an absence of such a theory proves god's existence you are essentially saying, "I can't prove god does or does not exist, therefor god exists."

Dustbin, pls.

How fuck.

Quote from: The Waifu Master on November 01, 2014, 01:47:56 PM

How fuck.

Fishermen Waifu, fishermen.

goddamn