Saying that "God" doesn't exist is unscientific. We can't even see before the Big Bang, light and time didn't exist.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

๐Ÿ™๐Ÿ™Œ

God is a one way function.

How about god doesn't care?

God doesn't necessarily have to be a conscious being, like some call it "Energy"๐Ÿค”

Because it can't be conscious, then see all the cruelty in the world and do nothing?

Even god substitutes like karma and "the force" are conscious that way!

Very true. Nikola Tesla had a similar view on this. He always thought life and dimensions should be viewed as energy and vibrations. His view was very similar to the multidimensional theory.

Oh boy! Here we go. ๐Ÿฟ๐Ÿ˜ฌ

Correct. Scientific claims must be falsifiable. An unfalsifiable claim is neither true nor false.

Claims of supernatural beingsโ€™ existence (or nonexistence) are unfalsifiable and therefore unscientific.

To make any sweeping claims regarding any deity in any direction is unscientific. The greatest argument that can be made is "parsimony". But that's highly subject to the manipulation of perspective. One could say it's not parsimonious that a deity designed the intricacies of the human eye. Another may claim it requires even greater assumptions to claim that the intricacies of the eye simply developed meaninglessly over centuries before it even worked.

It truly is fascinating. But always remember: what was "magic" a millenia ago, is "magnets" today โค๏ธ

๐Ÿ’ฏ, I think the most honest answer should be "We don't know", arguing otherwise is unscientific.

The honest answer is: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

The answer isn't "we don't know", the answer is "what the fuck are you on about?"

Agreed. And what is described in the Bible seems like nothing more than a primitive interpretation of advanced technology. Just my two cents. ๐Ÿ‘๐Ÿ˜ฌ

Flying Spaghetti Monster.

The philosophic burden of proof lies upon those who make unfalsifiable claims, not on those who reject them.

Nah we are not gonna abandon morals and religions just cuz some dude at Oxford or whatever wants us to. Cultures closer to God got their shit togethers. Others becoming godless decaying as a result imo imo (not a fanatic here hhehe)

Most of the things I just described wouldn't have been possible without Albert Einstein, who was a religious person. It is possible to be both religious and scientific.

๐Ÿคmy 2 sats. But dude you're young, at least you're not already ruling out the possibility

Despite the NASA imagery, you still like....1s0s hold uppppp lolll

Science is merely the most current compilation of observed consistencies, nothing more. Science actually describes very little about how anything works or the fabric of our reality.