Why so confused? When people started questioning religion and gods, instead of just going with the flow like everyone else, they started relizing that maybe it was just as crazy as any other superstitous crap. What evidence would convince you? I cannot see him with the naked eye, I cannot hear him, communicate with him in any way, touch him or have any reason to believe that anything that happens has anything to do with this imaginary dude so many people are convinced is there. LOL, yeah you're speaking to me through this forum. At this point I don't doubt that you exist. I agree, but not giving any other indicator that he exists isn't much help if we're (apparently) going to hell for it. Much less giving these god ideas the time of day. Haha, I'm not quoting you I'm quoting Wikipedia on the definition of an argument from ignorance. You haven't said that in those exact words, but you keep on asking for proof that God doesn't exist. No, it's a hypothetical claim I made to demonstrate how finding proof for something that doesn't exist is nearly impossible. Ok, let me "retract" my statment. That may have been incorrect. (this is a badge of honor for you to go brag to your friends.) I don't suppose you can dis-prove a god anymore than you can dis-prove 2012, water witching or the great tea cup? (do you believe in any of these things?) Let's get back to the tea pot. Let's say, for sake of argument, I believe in the tea cup. I kill for the tea cup and have passionate debates in favour of it. Do you have evidence to dis-prove that it exists? Do you need faith to not believe in my hypothetical tea cup god? Do you need faith to dis-believe every crazy claim people make?
We're not talking about religion right now, I'm asking you to provide the so called evidence that you have. But of-course you don't have it. The question is - what do you have? Obviously you haven't got any evidence whatsoever. None of this is evidence. Then why are you making the argument that "God does not exist because He hasn't spoken to me"? This argument fails. A child has a difficult time understanding why 1+1=2 .. you have a hard time understanding why God exists..just because you don't understand, does not mean God does not exist. You made the claim! .. it's not like I am chasing you around asking for something you never made a claim for. If you are going to make a claim you must back it with evidence, which you haven't done, and you never will. So it took you this long to admit that you are wrong, this is proof that you are full of pride. Do you feel superior to others Clinton?
Not being able to observe, experience, sense, see, hear, touch or measure something isn't evidence that it doesn't exist? Is that something you are really going to claim? (now watch him misunderstand the difference between proof and evidence)
10,000 years ago, you could not, "observe, experience, sense, see, hear, touch or measure" the planet of Pluto, did it mean that it didn't exist?
Are you suggesting that sometime in the future, technology will reach the point at which the invisible jar with Mohammad's soul that I carry in my pocket will be discovered?
Interesting point IsraeI.. Allow me to address it.. Let's go back 10,000 years in time.. That time I could not "see, observe, experience, sense, hear, touch or measure" pluto. So, yes it didn't exist for me. But then it existed for no one.. Lets say, you were the first one to discover the Pluto. Once you did it, you came to me and said - "Well, you know there is a planet far away from us that I just discovered. I'm gonna call it Pluto" I said - "Bollox, a planet far away from us? I don't believe you, how can you possibly even know that?" Now you could have one of two responses. Response a) "Uhh, can you prove that it doesn't exist? Can you prove me wrong? It exists because I say so". Response b) "Well, it exists, I've seen it. Even you can see it yourself, I can show you". Tell me, which response do you think is logical and which one does sound like a load of crap?
It didn't exist? Of-course it did exist, I cannot believe you just said that. The point was that just because you cannot "see, observe, experience, sense, hear, touch or measure" something does not mean it does not exist. Why do you ask this question? It's totally irrelevant.
No, it didn't exist for me or anyone else who didn't know that it exists.. Why? because when I didn't know whether something like that existed anywhere, it was not my knowledge so it did not exist for me. Okay, IsraeI. What do you know about the Planet Foxatrotta? No, it's not irrelevant. It's completely relevant and you know that. But you wont answer it, instead you will go to any length just to avoid answering it..
Nope. Definition of Lie - Denying existence for something, that I didn't even know that it existed, is not lying. Pluto's existence wasn't a knowledge. It didn't exist for people. If I'd said [back then] that it doesn't exist, you couldn't have proved me wrong if you, yourself, didn't have enough evidence to prove it's existence. But if I denied it's existence, even when I saw it with my own eyes and realized that it does exist indeed or once you'd proved it's existence beyond any reasonable doubt, then it would be a lie. So does it exist for you?
Is it wrong to say [10,000 years ago] that "Pluto does not exist", do you see anything wrong with it? Don't you think you should give proof that "Pluto doesn't exist" before you can make that statement? I don't know. I cannot comment until I see proof. You are not capable of saying "I don't know" because you are too proud, too arrogant.
The Webby, your summation that the planet did not exist is not correct, proven afterwords, of course, but your approach to the unknown conclusion at the time is inappropriate. Yes we would not have asked those questions at the time, yes we know this...... if something you cannot observe exists you can not say that it does not exist because you cannot observe it and quantify it. so you cannot say it does not exist or you can say it does exist, but cannot prove it. what if God is something that exists? we cannot observe it or not observe it but it can exist..... the religious ittirate that God does exist but have not observational proof. so how can a scientist say they are wrong or not? simple. @The Webby - i will answer your post about my quantum mechanic post later. i had a great post about your post the other night but i hit that left click funky button on the mouse and the post i was posting on delivered me to my profile page. i am working the night shift tonight so i'll post later, but schrodinger is about linear quantum mechanics not the other issues about quantum mechanics. schrodinger demonstrated a straightforward thought process to quantum mechanics when it can be more complicated than that at this point, based on our observational skills as of now. hint... how do waves proprigation behave with this thought experiement? how do electrons behave with this thought experiemnt? schodinger is a point in the process of quantum mechanics as of now.
LMAO!!! Let's go back 10,000 years in time once again.. That time nobody knew there was any planet far away from us, called Pluto or Fluto for that matter.. Then one day you came to me and said - "Well, you know there is a planet far away from us that I just discovered. I'm gonna call it Pluto" I said - "Bollox, a planet far away from us? I don't believe you, how can you possibly even know that? Can you even prove it?" Now you could have one of two responses. Response a) "Uhh, can you prove that it doesn't exist? Can you prove me wrong? Don't you think instead of asking me for proof, YOU ought to give proof that "it doesn't exist", before you can make that statement? It exists because I say so". Response b) "Well, it exists and yes, I can prove it. I've seen it and even you can see it yourself, I can show you. Here, take this telescope and see it yourself". Now tell me, which response do you think is logical and which one does sound like a load of crap? I can not prove that planet Foxatrotta exists, but I'm saying it exists. Now does it exist for you? Does planet Foxatrotta exist for you Eric?
I know what you are trying to do, I'm not going to let you change the subject. you are forgetting why I brought the whole pluto thing in the first place, Stox seems to believe that if you cannot see, hear, touch, feel, sense experience something, then it does not exist, and I proved him wrong with the pluto argument. It exists, but I don't have knowledge about it yet. And just because I don't have knowledge about it, does not mean it does not exist, it's about time you understand this. If you say "Pluto does not exist" [10,000 years ago] what you are doing is lying my friend, a lie is a lie, whether you did with knowledge or out of ignorance. Similarly when you say "God does not exist" you are lying to yourself and to others.
Changing the subject? LMAO, I know that you will go to any length just to avoid answering this question.. I'm not changing the subject mate.. The question is bang on the subject. I'm just putting your own question in the context. See, how stupid does that look when put into the right context? You didn't prove stox wrong. You only brought yourself to a question that you don't want to answer. No it doesn't.. I made up the planet. It's my wild imagination. If you believe that it exists because I say so, then you have to believe me when I say there is no God. There is no proof at all that any planet called Foxatrotta exists anywhere in the universe, unless I find a new planet and name it Foxatrotta. Now I will answer your retort that I deliberately ignored - Actually you are not capable of accepting that 'you don't know' if God really exists. You have no proof that God exists yet you have hard time excepting that may be there is no God. May be you are afraid or may be you lack logic, but you are lying to yourself and everyone else... All you have is a blind faith that God exists, which is fine. But your blind faith doesn't prove anything.
@The Webby You are from the planet Foxatrotta where you worship a three headed clown god.You drive a 40 year old car loaded with thousands of bananas.And you're a little orange pot bellied cat.All in all I'd say you were pretty typical of the average member here on DP.
Once again: The Garden is the physical presence of the Creator. The Garden can be - "observed, experienced, sensed, seen, heard, touched and measured"
Yes it's changing the subject. My question was to Stox: Is Pluto non-existent if it hadn't beeen "observed, experienced, sensed, seen, heard, touched and measured" [10,000 years ago]. Then you came to try twist things. The fact is that even if you have not ""observed, experienced, sensed, seen, heard, touched and measured" Pluto [back then], it does NOT mean it didn't not exist, something cannot exist and not exist at the same time. You have indeed been dis-proven, and like a stubborn child you refuse to admit this so you try to change the subject on me. Once you agree that you are wrong, then you may change the subject. The proof is not there to believe in this, but there's also no proof that this planet doesn't exist, you see, therefore I have no right to say that "it doesn't exist" because I would be making a positive claim, any positive claim requires proof. The correct thing to say is "I don't know", a phrase you hate very much because you don't like others to see you as ignorant, so you pretend to be this guy that knows everything. We're not talking about this right now, were talking about whether [10,000 years ago] Pluto is non-existent if you haven't "observed, experienced, sensed, seen, heared, touched or measured" it. I will ask you again: Is Pluto non-existent if you cannot ""observe, experience, sense, see, hear, touch and measure"? Don't reply to me that it didn't exist, because it has been proven later that it did indeed exist.
It's your inability to provide an honest answer for a question that is just too overwhelming for you. As I said, you will go to any length just to avoid answering it. Not surprising though. You have simple problem grasping the fact that 10,000 years ago any planet called Pluto didn't exist for anyone. Sure there were gazillions of planets in the whole universe, but a planet called Pluto didn't exist until it's discovery in 1930, when Clyde Tombaugh discovered the 9th planet of the solar system and Venetia Burney gave it the name Pluto. Did the celestial body orbiting around the sun, roughly positioned at 48 AU (farthest) exist 10,000 years ago, that no one knew it existed? Yes. Did the Planet called Pluto exist 10,000 years ago? No. People believed Pluto was a planet for many years, but now it's not even a planet.. If you went and told people that Pluto isn't a planet, back in 1980s, people would have called you a lunatic. But obviously you can't tell the difference between existence of a random celestial body and existence of a planet called Pluto... Yeah, Foxtrotta is a hidden 4th planet of our solar system. It shares roughly the same orbital path as earth [only a 1,200 miles wider] but it is positioned just opposite the earth. It's orbital period is 365.78 earth days. That's why no-one has discovered it yet, because it is always hidden behind the sun. The planet has intelligent life just like Earth they believe in the same God as I do, the almighty Three Headed Clown Monster, but they are not aware of our existence for the same reason as we are not, i.e. There is the Massive sun between us every time, all the time. Since you can not prove me wrong, and you accept that planet Foxatrotta exists, be sure to teach this to your kids. You don't want to talk about this anytime. Every time you will find one excuse or another. Of course you think I'm wrong, it's just your lack of logic, gullibility and tendency to believe fairy tales are true.