Atheist(s) - which science destroys theism?

Question

How do you conclusively blow apart my theist perspective - which field of science, proves your view that I am all wet?

The insults are kind of sad, really, almost name calling -

So theism is completely subjective, and science completely objective?

I don't need to prove anything to you - you have boldly stated your claim that I am, for lack of better word, a fool for believing as I do. I have not said the same of you, just asked how you are so certain in your belief. I assumed science was your justification.

I've never viewed philosophy as a science.

Answer 1

You must acknowledge that there is a God, before you can disavow
that there is no God.

The only science that would apply would be the science of philosophy.

One must have faith in order to believe in anything that is unseen.
You have faith in the belief that there is no God. Whether you are right or I am right for believing that there is a God is something that can not be determined by science. If I am wrong or you are wrong who is to say. I only know that when I die I don't don't want to be wrong.

Answer 2

Science cannot even address the deific concept.

Free will doesn't exist, though, which puts quite a damper on the concept of a deity.

If any single science most conclusively showed the lack of free will, I'd have to say computational science, via the Church-Turing Thesis.

Without free will, deity just doesn't make much sense.

Answer 3

Sadly there is no science which destroys religion. Shamefully it seams religion is hurt more by outright lies such as Jesus bones more than anything else. There are so many fools that actually believe that nonsense. Only time can erase that foolishness from the minds of idiots. Then as soon as it is forgotten some one will find Noah's Ark or the remains of the Garden of Eden or some other such nonsense. It is one big cycle. Only education can destroy religion. The entire Earth will never be educated. We will always have religion just as long as it is of value to the politicians.

Answer 4

Unfortunately your beliefs are based on something that does not exist and therefore is untestable. Not sure if you can comprehend that, but it is like trying to get science to prove the existence or non-existence of the tooth fairy. Can that be done? No, because anyone could always say that since science can not prove that she does not exist, then she may possibly exist. Hopefully you can follow that logic, which I realize is difficult for theists.

Answer 5

Obviously none, or it'd be destroyed already.

One thing to note is that science relies on observable data. Tests are performed where we can observe data in a consistent fashion.

I don't know what your theist perspective is. It either is supported by science (if you believe that the sun is a mass of incandescent gas) or it cannot be addressed by science (if you believe that a magical pixie grants wishes).

So, no science can disprove your perspective unless you believe in something that is scientifically unsound, such as believing that the sun orbits the Earth.

Answer 6

One possibility : there have been 2 aspects of two dimensional , non clever potential latest in a "universe" the place the length of time and the third length did no longer exist . those 2 energies interacted and the end result grow to be the creation of our Universe (rely , dark rely and potential) besides because of fact the length of time and the third length . question : the place did this potential come from ? answer : it consistently grow to be - in a universe that had no length of time ! Or , it spontaneously got here into existence it extremely is interior the medical opportunities . Or we in basic terms don't comprehend yet . yet another possibility : the international and it extremely is entirety is a cycle of compression and enhance . All rely compacts right into an area smaller than the factor of a pin , after which loses cohersion and at present expands . question : the place did this tiny quantity of compressed rely come from ? it consistently grow to be , or it got here into existence from nonthingness , or we don't comprehend yet . a third possibility : This Universe grow to be created as a digital fact recreation, in basic terms like Grand robbery vehicle , by a complicated race of beings . The question of how THEY got here to be is their difficulty . yet those beings who created us are no longer all solid and all useful . technological information does no longer disprove God . It disproves Biblical and different scriptual acounts of "God" It proves that an clever writer "God" isn't required for the existence of our Universe . logic proves that there's no all solid and all useful "God" in touch with our Universe . Monte54 ... particular i visit assist you to cite Einstein ... What you published isn't a quote yet o poorly shaped mish-mash of a few phrases Eientein uttered , and a variety of of alternative he did no longer . A QUOTE consists of the precise phrases and in basic terms the phrases of that man or woman ... no longer the phrases of your man or woman incorrect memory or your mind's eye .

Answer 7

It doesn't require a specific field of science to "disprove" theism. The fact is, there is simply no scientific evidence to support theism, so there's no reason to believe it's true.

Answer 8

This is proved by "your" science. Take a look at the website listed below if you are prepared to be convinced.

Answer 9

It's not the job of science to do that- I wouldn't even try. The supernatural by definition must be outwith the scope of science.

Answer 10

Philosophy.

Or Epistymology (how we know what we know)

Its not science's job to prove your crackpot theory is wrong. Its your job to prove to science that it's correct.