Log in with a social network:
Log in with your username or email:
Personally, i dunno wheter there is a god or not, but if there is... he wont be using a simple binary reward/punishment system.(good/bad heaven/hell that sort of thing.)
You do have a point.
Is it superfluous to add that I do believe that God exists?
And I wish people would stop saying "god doesn`t exist" and just say "I do not believe god exists," But that`s not going to happen, is it now?
really, the way you strive to live isnt any different than a good person without religion choosing to just treat others the way they wish to be treated. you just believe you`ll get rewarded for it, or something.
at least, that would be something cool....
2) Even in the off chance that he proved A god exists doesn`t mean that he proved that THE CHRISTIAN god exists. This seems like a rather huge leap.
Well then, who said that was our purpose.
"Well if you feel you ahve a purpose in life believing in a God that has not a single shred of evidence for existing, what would change if said god was proven to not exist? You life would still be exactly the same, your beliefs aside. And besides, even if he does exist, what meaning does that give to your life? Servitude?"
Well hell, if I knew what the Meaning of Life was, I`d be a damn gajillionaire. I don`t know what He has in store for me.
In every single atheism vs theism argument I`ve seen, atheists are always saying, "Show me scientific proof!" Now that this guy thinks he`s found that proof, some CHRISTIANS are saying, "Nuh-uh! That doesn`t count!""
NOT TRUE! Many people have been in here asking to SEE THE PROOF. One of the cornerstones of science is that a theory must be subject to peer review, so let him publish his work and let his peers review his math and his equations and go from there.
I really should throw it away as everybody (who believes) knows God created Man, and not vice versa as Tipler believes.
He is regarded as a quack by his peers.
IMHO belief in God is a matter of faith and (rightly) defies scientific proof--God asks for faith, not proof.
Idiot or idiot savant, your choice. Certainly not any sort of intelligent.
In every single atheism vs theism argument I`ve seen, atheists are always saying, "Show me scientific proof!"
Now that this guy thinks he`s found that proof, some CHRISTIANS are saying, "Nuh-uh! That doesn`t count!"
Oh, my God, sometimes I love people...
Sigh... my small minded-ness finds it difficult (and boring) to read the high-vocabulary-ish comments. Thus, I shant.
just a way for insecure people to not think too hard and hurt themselfs over this matter.
Well if you feel you ahve a purpose in life believing in a God that has not a single shred of evidence for existing, what would change if said god was proven to not exist? You life would still be exactly the same, your beliefs aside. And besides, even if he does exist, what meaning does that give to your life? Servitude?
Well, technically, if there is no supreme being and we have been in fact put on earth by series of evolutionary events and whatnot, then there was no working mind making a plan for us humans, meaning we are only here because of science... Science doesn`t think, so there is no purpose to life.
Even if though, would any of you be saying the same thing had this been a video that proved God DIDN`T exist..watch your hypocrisy...take science in as a whole..don`t pick and choose..it contradicts what science is about..
People keep asking for any sort of explantion or any sort of peer review ( in a 3 min news spot..be real..think..) but everyone jumped over Luet_Seers post like it didnt exist..it`s interesting..take a read
Minus the antimatter
Either way, equations don`t prove god exists
This is the internetone website, for links when you are bored.
iab posts a link about science and religion and you come running like sheeep.
ITS THE INTERNET
ill assume that was aimed at me,life is what we make of it. and what weve been making of it for a long time before any gods came about. what is fame and fortune to any other species? nothing!. it is individual to our class of living.
why is it pointless? if even 1 halfwitted individual could explain something to me in a way to make me question my self. would leave me walking away with something
what makes the basics of 1 god different from the next? simply the religious culture and ceremonies, i dont think its the christian god hes trying to prove. but rather that theres a force behind all of it.
as a matter of fact. these are the debates i long for. as while i may have to sort through piles of steam covered poo. i know ill find something!
but he cant prove that god exists because he`s using experimental science, and by experimental i mean theres no proof that it all work, only that we have made it work.
this is bullpoo anyway, he`s a parish ministers thingie, so he is always going to find god, coz he`s looking for it.
if it is proven by every other known force in existence, i`ll accept god exists. but as of yet im not gonna take the word of a science teacher in the bible belt of the us of ass...sorry a
My point, prime, was that his "conclusion" was that the Christian God exists, when in fact his logic could be equally used by Sikhs to `prove` that Vishnu exists, or by Vikings to `prove` that Thor is the real god.
He has picked the Christian God as his conclusion because that`s the one he believed in as a kid. He has ignored any other possible outcome. Therefore, his logic is flawed. It`s just bad science.
So no, it wasn`t ad hominem.
seriously... i mean really now. seriously?
god = true = theres a meaning to lifegod = false= were a slice of DNA that got a bit too advanced
um... yeah I have the proofs right in front of me.. therefore it must be true.
.. maybe there is too much "maths stuff" for you to understand... and you should just accept what I say.
Either that or he`s just a pastor who knows how to manipulate gullible people with fancy symbols on a chalk board.
if it is true, then the textbooks will change... they have to... by the very definition of science.
Where as religion does not change... canonical law is divine and is not subject to variation.
PUBLISH YOUR PROOF... if it is true, then give me the chance of salvation through seeing you are correct....
Or give me the chance to show you that you are full of Sh*t...
if it is true what do you have to hide?
Also, if he can "mathematically" prove the rising of the dead, shouldn`t he be a bit more well known than he is? Shouldn`t he be out accidentally triggering the zombie apocalypse or something?
OK, here is where you`re wrong. SCIENCE and SCIENTISTS are two different things. Science follows a set of rules. While most scientists take a vow to uphold those rules, they are all human. Some so-called scientists do not subject their work via the Scientific Method and, as such, should not be called scientists because they are not following science. It`s that simple. It`s just the same way how Priests rape children yet do so in the name of good morals in the name of "God". The truth is, it`s not the fault of the positive message of the church, it`s the fault of the priest. In the same way, science isn`t faulty because of a bad scientist, or psudo-scientist.
I mean, what kind of a joke is it when the equation equals the word "God exists". The mere fact that God is still yet to be defined physically as opposed to metaphysically means that it cannot be quantified until then. And if it cannot be quantified then it cannot be "proven". I mean, the whole point of quantum physics is that its QUANTIFYING the physical systems underlying major physical systems.
I am not impressed or amused.
The mods must really take you guys for suckers
The Matrix is a very well entrenched idea now, due to its three movies. It`s not productive to ask if the Architect or the giant computer is God, because its just a question of semantics. I could create a little computer game, it doesn`t make me a god, and I think many, many God-botherers would agree.
Uhhhh...no it`s not. Not sure who fed you that line, but they`re wrong. Most people are unaware what a Theory is and obviously you`re one of them. Scientifically, gravity is still a theory, but it`s also been established as scientific fact as well. The difference between science and religion is that science is always willing to admit when it`s wrong when a new hypothesis, theory, testing, proof of results, and scientific peer review establishes results. Religion, on the other hand, is rigid. It does not change its beliefs when obvious evidence shows the contrary. It is not open to new ideas and new ways of thinking regardless of the evidence. The beauty behind science is that they are willing to admit they don`t know something, like the Big Bang. Scientists are pretty positive it happened because of the massive amount of data that proves it, even though they admit they don`t know HOW it happened.
I think there IS a supreme being(s) that created the universe, but the true questions are:Is this supreme being watching over us? Will praying to it change anything? Can he speak to us?
I don`t know. And I don`t think I ever will.
P.S. Apologies for the text wall and double post.
Here`s an example. Maybe there is another huge universe that we may not see or know. Imagine that in this supreme universe, there is a video game designer, just like we have here. But he (we`ll say `he` to avoid confusion) is designing our universe. Maybe he tried many things before, none worked except our universe.
What do YOU mean...`You people`????"
What do YOU mean "You people"?!
What do you mean... "You people"?"=========================================
What do YOU mean...`You people`????
What do you mean... "You people"?
As for proving Gods existence with physics and math i guess he uses some sort of gap logic to do it; we can explain this or that and therefore it must be god. Ofc i can`t be sure thats how it is since this clip does nothing to explain how he proves the existence of a god.
Btw I am a Christian.
He is a physics professor at Tulane...prestigious school, hard as hell subject. Doubt he`s a hick
Belief does not equal evidence.Science does not equal god.
...you wouldnt understand it anyways...
Reporter 1: Aha! This man says he can prove God exists using science!
Reporter 2: Does he have credible information?
Reporter 1: Ah.....no.
Reporter 2: Roll the story, and show some mathematical equations and stuff. The public is stupid.
why the hell is Bobby in Guatemala?shouldn`t it be Boberto or something?"
pomunium - in trying to rename Bobby; apparently double middle names are the usual over there. So how about Georgio Boberto-Roberto, in Guatemala?
My thoughts exactly.
But if the equation is legit thena) doesnt mean god existb) doesnt mean you can simply disregard his equation.
You have to treat it as a theory and see if it is disproven
sjaakworte:"brandonabe- it`s more that he just picks a random unkown factor what he calls god, so it is explained. wich all religious people do."
well we first have to learn his definition of god. If is definition of god is some unknown force then there we go.
"You CANT PROVE ANYTHING TRUE in science... they are all theories."
You m`am win. Although I think it was a mathematical proof he was trying to do... im not sure
"bullsh.t random equations + speculation = btw, god exists."
If you cant understand the equations that doesn`t mean its bullpoo
"Surprise, he was a committed Christian for 4 years as a kid. And surprise, his science "proves" that the Christian God must exist. "
Ad hominem *cough*
It assumes there is no cost to believing, when there is.It assumes that the god you choose to believe in "just in case" is the correct one.It assumes that the god will be fooled by your "just in case" belief.
If you`d like to see Pascal`s Wager get more thoroughly owned, watch this video.
ahh, see i`ve done these complex maths equations, that you wouldn`t understand and therefore i don`t need to tell you buy you`ll believe me=D
why the hell is Bobby in Guatemala?shouldn`t it be Boberto or something?
Bumblebees aren`t even supposed to be able to fly, according to physics...yet they do...so is it probable that we need to rethink physics as a whole entirely and base it all around that bee?
(Am I on topic? I think I am...)
a = ba^2 = b^2a^2 - b^2 = 0(a-b)(a+b) = 0(a-b)(a+b)/(a-b) = 0/(a-b)1(a+b) = 0(a+b) = 01 + 1 = 02 = 01 = 01 + 1 = 1"
This problem is a lot like the `science proves god` thing... how can we trust science that we don`t understand? The woman even said that it goes over most peoples heads. Yet they still believe it?
It`s like the 1+1=1 thing... it makes sense if you blindly decide that it`s true, but not if you know that a^2 - b^2 =/= (a-b)(a+b)
(a-b)(a+b)=a^2+ab-ba-bWhich is not not a^2 - b^2
But if you were using that to prove that point, good for you ;D
Even good scientists like this guy have to cheat to try to justify their beliefs through science. Intellectual dishonesty annoys me more than pretty much anything else I can think of.
This deconstruction of his argument sounds a lot more like faith than science to me.
Granted, it was the News Program that presented the argument in this way. Basically, I feel that such a bold claim as "I can prove god`s presence with science" is going to require a lot of explanation. This video does not provide any explanation. I understand a decent amount of modern scientific thought. I am by no means an expert, but I would appreciate it if they attempted to explain it. such a lack of actual, communicated proof leads me to believe he is just a crazy southerner who thinks he found god.
I came here hoping for an actual scientific explanation, instead, I just heard more faith mumbo jumbo.
by count, its science - 2000; god - 1.
He might aswell have said "The circumference of a circle is always 3.14.... times it`s diameter, So that /must/ be God!"
really? go back to 4chan plz.
also, wat a fecking dickhead.. yeh well done, hes taken two of the hottest topics in physics which the every day person will have heard of but probably wont understand, but know that theyr "ooh, big & complicated", written a load of bull on a blackboard & came up with, o yeh, god definitly exists..id LOVE to see & rip into his explanation how...
Happy Dead Guy Walking the Earth Day Everyone!
But, that`s just like our "scientist" at 0:54 when he says that "if we use general relativity and quantum mechanics, then God must exist." Well, fact is, we don`t necessarily have to use general relativity or quantum mechanics. We may find flaws in some of the assumptions in those disciplines at some point. If we do, would the good professor then decide that God doesn`t exist? Or would he again adjust his "assumptions?"
His assumption is no less asinine than mine when I assumed I could divide by zero. It holds no merit and does not speak to the problem at hand. It is fallacy.
What the drat are you talking about ><
if 1+1 is 1 and 2. then how doas that logicaly makes sense? can math now have another path, then maybe he calculated wrong. he on the vidmaybe he godanswer one: satananswer two: godYES! Good exist!! (?) something like that? maybe?still. a formel and figure we cameup with can never describe god, if god exist I don`t think we may be able to see him or understand how he is,.I don`t belive in god. and I don`t belive in a meaning of life,, I think we are just egocentric animals who think we are beter than dogs case we can question why we exist
He`s a senile old man who knows nothing. His `equations` make no sense at all, in fact he logically proved himself wrong about half way through.
This `news` story is an embarrassment to the station. Not to mention media in general...
a = ba^2 = b^2a^2 - b^2 = 0(a-b)(a+b) = 0(a-b)(a+b)/(a-b) = 0/(a-b)1(a+b) = 0(a+b) = 01 + 1 = 02 = 01 = 01 + 1 = 1
Yay! I did it..."
Nuh uh. Nuh uh, see that`s wrong. Because....1 + 1.... = 11!
Beliefs. Not facts. They`re real to each individual person that holds them, but they don`t hold any weight by them self.
*shrugs* I anxiously await to see the stupid, and intelligent posts to this video. Even though, undoubtedly, most of the responses will be stupid. I`m foreseeing something along the lines of...
lol Or something. I know there will be at least one.
a = 1b = 1
Yay! I did it...
He is both a creationist and a scientist, but that`s not really the point.
His claim is indeed amazing, that he can prove god using only scientific observations and theories of the natural world.
My problem with this is that it appears he isn`t submitting his material for peer review as a scientist should do. As the other guy said, I find it interesting, and I would like to know his definition of god.
Even if you are correct, you have no more reason to doubt the mathematical equation (unless there is an apparent error in the equation itself) than you do anything else we have learned through our study of quantum mechanics, mathematics and physics, unless of course your problem with there being a God has more to do with your own prejudices than it does with determining truth.
until then, the guy is just some crackpot, that can fool gullible reporters looking for a story.
Either way, the professor sounds like he`s lost it.
- Rates 3*, and prepares for science-religion flamewar... -
So who does the media interview?