Scientific evidence of God by an atheist (Where mankind is one likely type of God)
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-11-2016, 10:01 AM
RE: Scientific evidence of God by an atheist
[Image: 2j7g2a.jpg]

This one needs to go away and take monkeybutt with him/her.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF

We're all mad here. The Cheshire Cat
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2016, 10:10 AM
RE: Scientific evidence of God by an atheist (Where mankind is one likely type of God)
Hey at least dude, unlike most of the lot of you, realizes he is God. .... And he's black. .... And big. ...... and scary. 'Cause he's big ... and black. Shocking

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2016, 12:38 PM
RE: Scientific evidence of God by an atheist (Where mankind is one likely type of God)
On Saturday when I'm taking a nap, it's scientifically proven that I have more influence over the universe than a fictional god, thus, I must be a god.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2016, 12:53 PM
RE: Scientific evidence of God by an atheist (Where mankind is one likely type of God)
(19-11-2016 09:54 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  Exact same thread posted on AF here

http://atheistforums.org/thread-46062.html

Expect Dunning-Kruger fuelled multi-coloured bold fonts and word salad.

I wouldn't bother answering. It's been tried already.

Unsurprisingly, he is not more coherent in a standard uniform font. Undecided

[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2016, 06:03 PM
Scientific evidence of God by an atheist
Here's the deal, everything you say in a font in any other color or size from standard, is automatically invalid. I'm not even interested in reading a fucking hostage note.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like TheInquisition's post
19-11-2016, 06:25 PM
RE: Scientific evidence of God by an atheist (Where mankind is one likely type of God)
(19-11-2016 09:54 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  Expect Dunning-Kruger fuelled multi-coloured bold fonts and word salad.

Laugh out load

I might appropriate that M.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Full Circle's post
19-11-2016, 11:16 PM
RE: Scientific evidence of God by an atheist (Where mankind is one likely type of God)
[Note 1] No opinion, faith, emotion, or bias was used in this thread.

I lol'd. No facts were used either. Also it's an image, not a thread, dipshit.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2016, 11:38 PM (This post was last modified: 19-11-2016 11:45 PM by Celestial_Wonder.)
RE: Scientific evidence of God by an atheist (Where mankind is one likely type of God)
There is a reason why I decided to start calling myself a nontheist naturalistic pantheist

If we define god as - the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe

The closest thing we know with such ultimate power is nature, in nature which we are a part of there exists 'wisdom' and 'goodness' on the part of our own existence in nature. As for creation and rule over the universe, we may be able to compare this to the hindu god of shiva, the god of destruction compared to the other two gods vishnu of preservation and brahman of creation. This is a 'trinity' of gods as we would call it.

It makes sense as well, that a god of creation could just as well be the god of destruction and preservation, in which the universe is constantly in the processes of both 'creation' 'destruction' and 'preservation'.

where as 'rule' could very well be attributed to logos and or the laws of the universe.

So essentially, nature is god.

Also Hinduism is amazing as a philosophy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-11-2016, 12:02 AM (This post was last modified: 20-11-2016 12:24 AM by ProgrammingGodJordan.)
RE: Scientific evidence of God by an atheist (Where mankind is one likely type of God)
(19-11-2016 11:16 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  [Note 1] No opinion, faith, emotion, or bias was used in this thread.

I lol'd. No facts were used either. Also it's an image, not a thread, dipshit.

(A)
All that has been presented is nothing but observed phenomena/FACTS.

(B)
FACTS/observed phenomena:

+Moore's Law

+Brain based models have already exceeded/equaled human performance on cognitive individual tasks/task groups

+As time diverges, computational parallelism increases. As such increase, brain based models enter more cognitive fields.

etc. Not a single opinion has been utilized.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-11-2016, 12:08 AM (This post was last modified: 20-11-2016 12:25 AM by ProgrammingGodJordan.)
RE: Scientific evidence of God by an atheist (Where mankind is one likely type of God)
(19-11-2016 08:28 AM)Velvet Wrote:  What's the deal with saying ''I have evidence for a god'' only to be shortly after unveiled that's not a god?

If I call my dick a God and provide evidence for the existence of my dick, how this is relevant to anyone aside from some very nerdy atheist girls with bad sense of pick-up line quality?

(A)
It appears that you have failed to absorb any of the scientifically observed/observable phenomena described.

(B)
Simply, the general consensus on God is likely FALSE.

The general consensus on God includes [omniscience, omnipotence, the ability to create universes/human intellect etc]

ONE property is LIKELY accurate, that is, the ability to generate non-trivial human intellect.

[Where mankind has already developed cognitive models that exceed human performance, in individual cognitive tasks, and shall likely develop models that exceed humans on all tasks by 2020, when brain based hardware approximates the human neuronal cycle]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: