Requirement for proof "God" doesn't exist

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
this is entirely the point for i am not trying to assert anything for the existence of God,
I am merely trying to demonstrate that belief is akin to a reality. All i have ever
stated is that we can draw inferences about the natural world which seem to be
indicative of intelligence and design. Nor can these inferences be disputed other than
...[text shortened]... carrying an effigy of Dawkins on a large pole! and Hamilton on a
pilgrimage to Darwins house.

If the inferences about the natural world, of intelligence and design, cannot be disputed other than by stating, "I don't believe that is so," then I think those inferences are what is called unfalsifiable -- there is no observation about the natural world that could possibly contradict them. This is why your inferences and Agers LOTR offerings are on equal footing, and if Noobster and Hamilton's claims are unfalsifiable, then they are there with you.

The way to differentiate your inferences from the pack would be to conduct natural-world experiments and predicted outcomes that will be seen to occur if and only if your inferences are correct, and that will not occur if any of their inferences are correct. This is how hypotheses become theories and then become accepted as scientific paradigms, like biological evolution has among scientists working in the field. You could propose the same challenge to each of them, asking them to propose such an experiment that would confirm their inferences and invalidate yours.

Originally posted by Agerg
not necessarily true: suppose I say to you that I know of a positive natural number which is both odd, and an integer multiple of 2; you could quite easily prove that I don't.

based on your statement that would be a lie, so HA! I win again!


plus: its not proving a negation its disproving a positive, very different things I think

Originally posted by Doward
based on your statement that would be a lie, so HA! I win again!


plus: its not proving a negation its disproving a positive, very different things I think

not sure I'm parsing what you're saying correctly...
Basically in my OP, I affirm X and you responded by saying one cannot prove ¬X

Firstly let X be the statement I know of a positive integer which is both odd and is a multiple of 2; whether this is a lie is irrelevant since to prove (in painful detail) I don't know of such a number you'd merely argue along the lines that if X is true then the number n I'm thinking of satisfies
n = 2r=2s+1 for r,s positive natural numbers
such that
n-n =2r-(2s+1)
=> 0=2(r-s)-1
=> 2k=1 for some integer k
=> 1 =/= 1
=> contradiction
=> ¬X is true

and so proving ¬X is quite simple here!

Now let X be the proposition "I have a proof that God doesn't exist"
Can you prove ¬X ?

Originally posted by JS357
If the inferences about the natural world, of intelligence and design, cannot be disputed other than by stating, "I don't believe that is so," then I think those inferences are what is called unfalsifiable -- there is no observation about the natural world that could possibly contradict them. This is why your inferences and Agers LOTR offerings are on equal fo them to propose such an experiment that would confirm their inferences and invalidate yours.

no its not the same, for unlike Aggy smaggy pudding and pie, i draw inferences from
the natural world, which i can observe, he has no world to which he can point for
Gandalf magicked it away, or so he says, therefore its impossible for him to draw any
inferences from a world which no longer exists. What is more, there are no
archaeological evidences that his world ever existed, his holy book contains to
principles with which one, through application can evaluate. He has no exemplar other
than a legendary wizard, of which if he were to fashion his life after he would go
around doing mere conjurers tricks. All in all its a sad state of affairs for dear Agers
and ol Gandalf.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no its not the same, for unlike Aggy smaggy pudding and pie, i draw inferences from
the natural world, which i can observe, he has no world to which he can point for
Gandalf magicked it away, or so he says, therefore its impossible for him to draw any
inferences from a world which no longer exists. What is more, there are no
archaeological e ...[text shortened]... g mere conjurers tricks. All in all its a sad state of affairs for dear Agers
and ol Gandalf.

what inferences do you draw from the natural world to conclude some bloke called Jesus was resurrected 2000 years ago, that a tree of knowledge once existed, that God made it rain for 40 days and nights wiping out pretty much the entire earth's population, and so on...?

Answer: nothing!

ditto with archaeological evidence!

Originally posted by Agerg
what inferences do you draw from the natural world to conclude some bloke called Jesus was resurrected 2000 years ago, that a tree of knowledge once existed, that God made it rain for 40 days and nights wiping out pretty much the entire earth's population, and so on...?

Answer: nothing!

ditto with archaeological evidence!

so Alexander the Great never came along, built a causeway from the mainland, across
to Tyre which was an island and torched the city as had been prophesied and attested
to by archaeology, Babylon was not breeched in one night, the river Euphrates not
diverted by the Medes and the Persians and Babylon left a ruin as has been
prophesied and attested to by archaeology, Jerusalem was not destroyed by Titus and
the Jews suffered terribly as had been prophesied by the Christ and is attested to by
secular historians and archaeology, please do explain Aggy why you have nada and
we have all of this and more?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
so Alexander the Great never came along, built a causeway from the mainland, across
to Tyre which was an island and torched the city as had been prophesied and attested
to by archaeology, Babylon was not breeched in one night, the river Euphrates not
diverted by the Medes and the Persians and Babylon left a ruin as has been
prophesied and att ...[text shortened]... ns and archaeology, please do explain Aggy why you have nada and
we have all of this and more?

please try again and demonstrate all the miraculous stuff happened. If I write a journal and intersperse it with magic and BS, would you accept the possibly factual stuff in the journal supports my claims of magic??? 😕

No prophecy that is of any importance has ever been shown
a) to have occured
b) to have been specific enough that it couldn't be patterned matched to any number of other events
c) wasn't written true by later authors
and so on...

Originally posted by Agerg
please try again and demonstrate all the miraculous stuff happened. If I write a journal and intersperse it with magic and BS, would you accept the possibly factual stuff in the journal supports my claims of magic??? 😕

why dont we actually try the evidence that is actually there, that we can corroborate
rather than that which we cannot? Are you denying these things happened Agers?
Are you denying they were prophesied in scripture to take place? are you denying
that archaeology corroborates the events? really ? on what basis are you denying
these realities dear Agers, do tell?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
why dont we actually try the evidence that is actually there, that we can corroborate
rather than that which we cannot? Are you denying these things happened Agers?
Are you denying they were prophesied in scripture to take place? are you denying
that archaeology corroborates the events? really ? on what basis are you denying
these realities dear Agers, do tell?

No no why don't we play fair and discuss all the magic and miracles: I don't contest that humans wrote the Bible as a sort of journal of events that happened or they wanted to happen (with naivety, ambiguity, and exaggeration); I contest all the BS like miracles you think is true!

Originally posted by Agerg
No no why don't we play fair and discuss all the magic and miracles: I don't contest that humans wrote the Bible as a sort of journal; I contest all the BS you think is true!

I have submitted three evidences that I can corroborate, you as far have produced zero, now lets see, that amounts too robbie and the Bible three, Agers and the LotR zero. Your not doing very well dear Agers in this regard, why is that? Have you no basis for disputing the assertions, you see, simply claiming that they did not happen is not really reasonable, is it? Have you no evidences of your own and are left with the bum hanging out of your trousers?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have submitted three evidences that I can corroborate, you as far have produced zero, now lets see, that amounts too robbie and the Bible three, Agers and the LotR zero. Your not doing very well dear Agers in this regard, why is that? Have you no basis for disputing the assertions, you see, simply claiming that they did not happen is not really r ...[text shortened]... is it? Have you no evidences of your own and are left with the bum hanging out of your trousers?

I asked for evidence that Jesus was resurrected 2000 years ago, that a tree of knowledge once existed, that God made it rain for 40 days and nights wiping out pretty much the entire earth's population.

You have provided nothing.

As for prophecies, reiterating my edit earlier:

No prophecy that is of any importance has ever been shown
a) to have occured and...
b) to have been specific enough that it couldn't be patterned matched to any number of other events and...
c) wasn't written true by later authors and...
and so on...

Originally posted by Agerg
I asked for evidence that Jesus was resurrected 2000 years ago, that a tree of knowledge once existed, that God made it rain for 40 days and nights wiping out pretty much the entire earth's population.

You have provided nothing.

i cannot offer proof for these, now you will address those which I can and while your at
it, you may like to offer some of your own or must you continue the charade and we
shall be forced to conclude that you are bereft? you say that they have not occurred,
that they are not specific enough, they were written after the event, how do we know,
you have not referenced one, nor provided one iota of evidence to support your claim,
have you, please explain.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
i cannot offer proof for these, now you will address those which I can and while your at
it, you may like to offer some of your own or must you continue the charade and we
shall be forced to conclude that you are bereft?

so Alexander the Great never came along, built a causeway from the mainland, across
to Tyre which was an island and torched the city as had been prophesied and attested
to by archaeology, Babylon was not breeched in one night, the river Euphrates not
diverted by the Medes and the Persians and Babylon left a ruin as has been
prophesied and attested to by archaeology, Jerusalem was not destroyed by Titus and
the Jews suffered terribly as had been prophesied by the Christ and is attested to by
secular historians and archaeology, please do explain Aggy why you have nada and
we have all of this and more?

All these prophecies that 'came true' early in our history could easily have been arranged to have come true by humans who had already seen such prophecies. As for the suffering of the Jews, we could pattern match that one to events happening in palestine right now, engineered by fundies with an agenda...we could pattern match it to the holocaust, and I'm sure we could pattern match it to many other events.

I'm not impressed! Indeed do you want me to dig up a prophecy that I made and came true for you? Will that substantiate the LoTR

Originally posted by Agerg
[i]so Alexander the Great never came along, built a causeway from the mainland, across
to Tyre which was an island and torched the city as had been prophesied and attested
to by archaeology, Babylon was not breeched in one night, the river Euphrates not
diverted by the Medes and the Persians and Babylon left a ruin as has been
prophesied and attested to by attern match it to the holocaust, and I'm sure we could pattern match it to many other events

and the evidence you have for your assertion that these events, constituting entire
nations, were pre arranged is based upon what dear Agers?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
and the evidence you have for your assertion that these events, constituting entire
nations, were pre arranged is based upon what dear Agers?

ok Bible says nation X is going to get pulverised...some pillock with a shed load of soldiers at his back, having read or been made privy to writings in the Bible and this prophecy comes along later and pulverises X because he thinks its his duty and destiny or whatever.

and I'm meant to be overwhelmed by this??? 😕