How could science prove God's existence?

Question

I have a few ideas based on known scientific proceedures, but I was just wondering if anyone had any new ideas on proving (or disproving) His existence...

Answer 1

Because there are many "Gods," each with their own definitions, and for the sake of science, let's settle on a simpler term: Creator.

First off, with all of our extensive knowledge, we cannot disprove there is a Creator.

Questions regarding our biological origin have lent themselves to numerous theories, but this approach really misses the point. The theories all start with the building blocks which were and are present on earth. The REAL question is: where did this stuff originate to begin with?

Big bang and all of it's energy - where did it come from?

It is often said that if you find a watch on the ground, you then know that some where there is a watchmaker. If we apply this same logic to the universe, then yes, there is a Creator. Can we prove it? No. But neither can we disprove it.

And, that, in a nutshell, is why it is called faith.

Answer 2

Science has already pretty much DISproven God's existance. When the early civilizations were around, like the egyptians, they needed to explain all of the natural things going on around them (the sun, the stars, the water, crops growing, etc.) so they came up with the Gods. These God's controlled the different aspects of nature, or influenced them in one way or another. Today, we call the Greek and Roman, and every other ancient civilization's stories about their Gods myths. In a few hundred or thousand years, eveyone will be calling "God" a myth, and telling the Christian stories from the bible as legends. Science has explained all of the things that the Gods were originally created to explain, and now, the only reason people hold on to a god or gods, is fear. They fear death, and what comes after. So they believe that there must be a higher power that makes sure that they are well taken care of after their passing. Once someone, somehow finds a way to show the world what happens after death, there will be no more use for a god, and they will eventually cease to exist.

Answer 3

Science can not prove or disprove the existence of God based on empiricism.

In order to perform an experiment to prove that God exists, you would need a control experiment, say a box, where you knew with a high degree of certainty that God was not.

Then you would have to design a test outside the box where you think God is existing. Considering God is supposed to be omnipresent, you can never have such a box.

Lets say that God is NOT omnipresent (heresy), how would you construct a "god-o-meter" that would allow you to test your control state to be absent of God?

Furthermore, many people have told me that God is "outside" of space and time. Whatever that means. If it's true, and all of our instruments work within the constraints of space and time, you can't measure God.

Can you even define God or propose an operational definition of God? I have never heard a consistent definition amongst different individuals, let alone different religions, sects or cults.

If you can't design an experimental non-God control, if you can't measure God, can't even define God, then you can not use science to prove God's existence.

It will all boil back down to hypothesis at best but will be supported only conjecture and hand waving.

Answer 4

For science to do anything, it must have a clear definition of what it is looking for.

From the geckgo, it must first define what is God. What is the signature and what it's characteristic. How much power, any limitation and what other aspects.
The reason I said that is because I got an impression that people may have a different definition of God and it's capability

Once the definition is agreed upon, then we can start looking into how we can proof it's existence or proof that eliminate the possibility of existence.

It may take a long while to do so. But at least we must define the scope first.

That's just my humble opiinion

Answer 5

Anything completely unique, with no likeness, is not provable at all, except, possibly to itself. Unless there is a concious connection between the unique and the one to know, and then there must be a concious likeness granted to know the uniqueness.

So if God is unique entirely from us, then we could not know, but if there are communicated qualities of that unique God, then we can know that much. While if God is not unique, then we can know as any other mundane discovery, such as a new species of bird, but how does that make it a god, of any kind, and not mere creature, however advanced and alien that "god" may be?

So we must define God as unique, but with that self-knowledge of God transferable to us, to know God does exist.

Einstein used what he thought God would do if he, Eistein, were all knowing to help him focus on doing thought experiment science. That doesn't prove God, but it does show one must be open to the possibility of knowledge to even perform the scientific investigation conciously at all - everyone does science to some degree, except the totaly self-dishonest, who don't even know what they do, and don't know.

Answer 6

If there were a god, most science would be meaningless
And vice versa
So i don't think one would try to prove the other

Answer 7

There is no way to prove the existence of God (until it's too late).

Answer 8

I do not think it is possible for science to prove the existance of God.

Unless of course God decided to reveal himself.

Answer 9

the idea of "God" came from the human need to look to something/someone "PERFECT". so if God is so perfect, and he created humans, science can never approve his existance, coz if it did, he wouldn't be God!

umm, it's like, humans created machine, so machines only know about humans (whatever humans decided to let them know) , but it's impossible for any machine to realise human existance through its "science"..

this makes me totally seperate religion from science:

if i do believe in God or not, this is totally based on my spiritual beliefs, has nothing to do with physics. if i do belive in Aliens, this is totally based on science, has nothing to do with God..

Answer 10

scientific procedure would go like this:
first you assume there is god and his existence can be measured through some effect that couldn't be anything else.
next you test this hypothesis.
then you'll probably reject it from lack of evidence to support your theory
then some religious fanatic Will burn your ***.