Is there any scientific evidence of Gods existence?

Answer 1

Not only is there no scientific evidence, there isn't even any RATIONAL evidence.

What there is an awful lot of is wishful thinking, and jumping to conclusions, as you can see by some of the answers you've received.

Most theists believe that absence of scientific evidence is sufficient proof that "godidit", which is of course ridiculous. 2000 years ago, meteors were scientifically unexplainable, so they were declared to be gods crossing the skies in their chariots.

Why theists reject this nonsense today, but continue to embrace things equally nonsensical like the Noachian flood or Intelligent Design is simply because we don't have concrete proof to make them look like embarrassed fools (which is exactly how they'd be feel if they declared meteors were gods.)

Answer 2

YES NOW WE CAN.
Read "The Souls of Distortion Awakening", by Jan Wicherink.
Here's the scientific evidence of God's existence.
You can download it for free at:
http://www.soulsofdistortion.nl/

Three hundred years ago, French philosopher René Descartes (1596-1650) took the liberty to divide our world into two domains, a material domain and a spiritual domain.
The spiritual domain became the subject of religion and the material domain was allotted to science. It was the start of an independent journey of a scientific community of scholars freeing themselves from the hitherto dogmatically established scientific facts dictated by Christianity with the Bible in their hands as the only source of holy truth.

Now after three hundred years since Descartes introduced the segregation of science and religion, science seems to come full circle; in a small but growing scientific community science has entered the domain of spirituality!
The bridge between science and spirituality has already been crossed!

Answer 3

yes if u can follow the formula below,

assuming X= God=0
and y= universe=1
and z = #441/2

then Xx236+yx441/2=1
then 0=1 and 1=0
assuming we deduct the universe from god
ie. 0-1=0
and x+y+z=1
then x=1=God

then god=1
so there is one God

Run for your life dude.. hes there waiting to roast your scientific A S S

Answer 4

Yes , if you can scientifically prove that you are brave, be sure that it show you the way to prove the existance of God .
Also you can do this for your intelligence , moral , idea and so on .
you are brave because of some evidences , you are intelligent , because of some evidences , .... .
God exists , because of the existnce of Nature , Creation , sky , .... .

Answer 5

Science by itself is the proof god's of existence.

Answer 6

All science is proof of existence of God. It is his binding laws for matter.

Answer 7

Yes!!!!!!!!! Lightning is obvious evidence that proves Zeus exists! Anyone who denies it is delusional.

Answer 8

Have you ever met a dead person who told you what heaven was like,,of course not you silly billy

Answer 9

fulfilled prophecy....A serious study will baffle most thinking individuals ... the only argument against it is ....some lousy uneducated type of thinking like the gospels were all made up or other bad/weak excuses....Another thought is ...Is there any real evidence that he doesn't exist...<+harder to prove I bet ...

Answer 10

1: Science gives us a way to distinguish between good ideas and bad ideas - i.e. to show which explanation is the most consistent with observable reality. Science shows us that great complexity does not just arise spontaneously. It is inconceivable that even the simplest bacterium could exist without something being responsible for the complexity of its structure, its biochemistry and so on. It would take the lifetimes of a billion universes for it to appear spontaneously, by pure chance - in fact it is probably safe to say that it simply could never happen. This goes all the more for human beings. It's surely no coincidence that the only thing that we regard as truly intelligent - the human brain - is also the most complex thing in the known universe. Intelligence requires enormous complexity, far beyond anything that could conceivably exist without something being responsible for its existence. By the same reasoning, it's infinitely more unlikely still that an intelligent entity capable of designing and creating an entire universe and everything in it could just exist from nowhere, from nothing, without anything being responsible for its existence. Complexity, and especially the massive complexity required for intelligence, can therefore only arise from an antecedent, non-intelligent process - In the case of life on Earth, this means biological evolution, a fact which is attested to by a vast amount of real objective evidence and valid argument. So, to the extent that science allows us to reliably distinguish between plausible ideas and implausible ideas, it effectively rules out the possibility of an intelligent entity as the uncaused cause of everything that exists.

2: We've known for thousands of years that the 'tri-omni' gods of classical monotheistic religions cannot exist. If an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent deity existed, then human evil could not exist. Since human evil unarguably does exist, the classical monotheistic deity cannot exist (objections about 'free will' notwithstanding).

3: Quantum Mechanics strongly suggests that nothingness is a state that cannot exist in reality, since that would be 100% deterministic, and QM says that existence is probabilistic rather than deterministic. Experimental evidence supports QM. If true, then this also precludes the existence of a creator, since it would be impossible to have a state of 'nothingness' from which a 'something' could be created.

4: David Hume proved that moral values are subjective - i.e. they describe a person's response to events, rather than objective properties of events themselves. Since morals are personal and subjective, there cannot be an external, objective source of moral values - Indeed, the idea is simply incomprehensible. Therefore, any god which is claimed to be the objective source of moral values cannot possibly exist. This includes the gods of most monotheistic religions, by their usual definitions.

5: Argument from design: If everything was designed by an intelligent creator then we would have no basis for identifying things that clearly *are* designed (things made by human beings) since we would have no non-designed (i.e. natural) things to compare them with. Therefore the natural world (everything that has not been designed by humans) must be non-designed, and therefore there can't be a designer god.

6: Anything that holds information or knowledge must be made of discrete parts, such as a brain (neurons and their connections) or a computer (memory locations). Anything that is made of parts cannot be self-existent - it must be made of something pre-existing. Therefore an intelligent entity cannot be self-existent and cannot be the source of everything that exists.

7: If a 'tri-omni' god existed, then it would be his desire that all human beings have an unshakeable belief in his existence and a perfect knowledge of what behaviour he wants from us, and it would be within his capacity to achieve this. Since many people neither believe in a god nor agree on what is the right way to behave, such a god does not exist.

---------------

More fundamentally though:

No-one really knows anything at all that isn't based on at least *some* unprovable assumptions - they're called axioms. For example, the only reason we can do science is that we *assume* the principles of logic and reason are valid - e.g. the law of non-contradiction. Things like this are inherently unprovable. You can't use reason to prove the truth of the very thing that reason relies upon for its validity.

If this is the case, then I'd say it's also impossible to 'prove' anything at all. The best you can do is to prove that something is not consistent with a person's axioms... or not true if the axioms are true. I've had personal experience of debating with people whose main axiom is that god exists. They claim to know god exists in the same kind of way that you and I know reason is valid - it's an assumption that is at the base of everything else... that all their other beliefs rest upon. Therefore you can't prove to them that their god doesn't exist, or that the question is unknowable, because they already 'know' he exists - or at least, they don't have any axioms that they would trust *more* than the axiom that "god exists" - including the basis of logic and reason.

Personally, I think I've proven to my satisfaction that a creator god does not and cannot exist. If I take it to be true that the external world really exists, and that reason and logic are valid ways to understand it, then it seems to me that an intelligent entity with no origin simply cannot exist. Anything intelligent would have to have a history, to be made of stuff that had to already exist, to be the product of an unthinking natural process (evolution) or the creation of a pre-existing intelligence (which in turn would have to have one of those origins). I don't think it's inherently unsound for me to draw this conclusion, based on the axioms I take to be true. Obviously I'm never going to convince someone else of this, if their most basic unshakeable assumption is that god exists.