If science can't prove God exists, is it good science to conclude that God doesn't exist?

Question

Is adding your personal beliefs to a scientific study good science? I suspect it's difficult, for a zealous atheist to be a good scientist...

Science deals with understanding and comprehending creation. Religion deals with the understanding and comprehension of the Creator.

...Schneb

Science cannot prove that a hummingbird's method of flight can work - we should not conclude that hummingbirds cannot fly.

teran_realtor

honestly though, there's more to life than what you see with your eyes.

Jane

The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

James B

With "God" apparently in front of the copncept of reality it may benefit both science and Religion to set aside that idea and seek common ground to find out what reality truly is

Adonai

Answer 1

That's the point. That isn't science. It's belief.

Science is a method. Scientific knowledge is a body of information/facts that are constantly open to question.

God cannot (yet) be proven either way. It is not the purview of science to prove or disprove God.

That is the effort of the branch of Atheism that is a belief system (vs. Atheism that simply sees no reason to believe in God as there is no proof, like believing in pink unicorns).

These belief-based atheists rarely have an grounding in scientific method (though they pretend - isn't web-searching wonderful?). They use scientific theories like clubs to disprove religion.

It's like using baseball bats to chase away clouds of hydrogen. Can't see it, can't actually connect with it, even if you could wouldn't make a bit of difference.

Baseball bats are very effective tools, but not for that.

Theories are very effective tools, but not for disproving God.

Are you religious? If so, it is good to see someone religious who is educated about science and it's function. There are many of you, just as there those who are not religious, but understand religion and it's function (gatherings of people who share beliefs about what we can't prove as a way to explore the universe of things unprovable, yet).

Answer 2

Not at all. Science, pretty much by definition, does not involve the realm of the supernatural, but that does not mean that it cannot investigate the supernatural. It has shown that the supernatural consistently fails the Reality test.

It is not Science's job to disprove God. You cannot prove a negative. It is the obligation of the believer to prove God exists and no one has been able to meet the challenge, not even God.

That is why belief in God is call Faith. That is why the Discovery Institute is on the wrong track.

Wayne T: Science can prove the DNA can form spontaneously. Earth had millions of years to do it though. Wait around and you will see it happen.

Answer 3

Science and Religion share one common fact, neither can claim, with any degree of integrity, to have the criteria to base an opinion on what "God" may be as a concept; the real deal is "what is the true nature of our reality"?

With "God" apparently in front of the copncept of reality it may benefit both science and Religion to set aside that idea and seek common ground to find out what reality truly is.

"God" is the biggest obstical to truth, and this is not fault of "Gods"...

Answer 4

"Science deals with understanding and comprehending creation"

Not really.

In answer to your question, science does not conclude there is no God. Science does not equal strong atheism. Personally, I feel there is nothing that points to a creator. There's just nothing supporting it; end of story. There's no way to prove someone didn't create the universe, but there's also no way to prove a pink bunny didn't.

Answer 5

The same could be said of Santa Claus, Ganesh, Zeus, Odin, Jupiter, Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, Allah, Thor, pink unicorns, so on and so forth.

Good science is the questioning of everything until an idea that explains observed data is developed. Then predicitions have to made and the idea tested repeatedly.... At this point, the idea is accepted as truth.... unitl a better idea that improves upon the original is put forth.

Answer 6

I don't think science has ever said that for 100% sure, God doesn't exist.

The un-disprovable nature of a God makes it impossible for anyone to say this.

The reason most scientists disagree with the idea of God is because ideas like evolution suggest other ways, more probably ways, in which life could have come about without a God.

You need to understand that no reputable scientist has ever said "I know for 100% certain there is no God".

Answer 7

No, while you employ countless "fancy" words, your statements do no longer connect and are not substantiated. technological expertise has no longer for sure defined count and potential to an volume you are able to say #a million. count isn't shaped while conciousness acts on any potential field. No credible individual would make this manner of declare. of course everthing is attached ... i've got been saying that for years, yet as an argument against the assumption of non secular ideals, no longer for them. each threat would not inevitably exist concurrently (purely hypothetically) and the only ingredient an observer performs in "becoming actuality" is that the observer creates their very own illusionary conceptualization of actuality it somewhat is often improper. Please make a visit on your interior reach library and study what technological expertise actually says. Or, in case you copied this from some e book or internet site, please notify the author to stop allotting invalid proofs ... whoever authored those statements became into confident of the existance of God past ... in any different case that they had no longer attempt to bypass it off as intellectually sound.

Answer 8

Science can't prove that fairies don't exist. Do you think they exist? Probably not. So why is that? Well, it's very unlikely they exist isn't it but you can't quite prove it. Well I guess then we have to be agnostic about fairies.

So let's move on to God. Can science prove he doesn't exist? No it can't. Does that mean God does exist? Of course not. Is there more evidence for God than there is for fairies? Absolutely not.

So, to answer your query, atheists are agnsotic about God the way they're agnostic about fairies. They could exist but it's a LONG shot.

And FYI, the proportion of Nobel Prizes awarded to atheists is extremely high considering the numbers of how much of the populace believes in religion. I suppose Darwin and Einstein were complete morons to you?

Answer 9

I suspect that you understand nothing about reliability of assumptions or how to calculate the probability of whether something might be true or not. Like most religious people you are only able to think in the extremes of absolutes. God is 1/1x10^1,000 likely to be real. That means vanishingly small chances exist. Next is the point that you fail to even define your God because every time a God has been defined it has been immediately proved impossible.

If I can not prove that your wife was a virgin before you had sex with her is it fair to assume she was?
Crawl back under your rock!

Answer 10

A Priori - God exists
A Posteriori - God exists
Empirically- God exists . Positive study 2007 @ Veritas... Arizona Univerzity ;)