Evidence for the existence of God (Part 3)

First topic message reminder :

The problem with discussions between theists and atheists is that eventually it comes down to the argument of not being able to prove a negative false. As a statistician, in my working life, I have often come across this as a problem. It really ends up as a lack of understanding of the concept of an hypothesis and the nature of the contrary position, the null hypothesis.
 
Consider the following example
 
Hypothesis 1 - There are fairies at the bottom of my garden. (My hypothesis or H1 for short)
 
In stating this I automatically generate a contrary (null) hypothesis which would be
 
Hypothesis 0 - There are no fairies at the bottom of my garden. (The null hypothesis or H0 for short)
 
The null hypothesis is entirely a consequence of stating the first hypothesis. If H1 is not true then we would automatically assume that H0 was true.
 
At this point (courtesy of the Cottingley Fairies and Arthur Conan Doyle) I produce a set of photographs. On scientific scrutiny these are held to be jolly fine photographs and completely fake. At this point I retreat into my bedroom to sulk and it is held that H1 fails on the basis of no evidence and therefore we accept the null hypothesis viz. there are no fairies at the bottom of my garden. Postulating that at some time in the future someone may come up with evidence that confirms H1 in no way changes the argument. We are dealing with NOW and as of NOW there is no evidence and the hypothesis fails. We accept H0. Wish fulfillment does not give you a reason to accept H1 in spite of the lack of evidence.
 
So now lets look at the existence of God argument.
 
H1 - God exists (the theist position)
which then automatically generates a contrary position
H0 - God does not exist (the atheist position)
 
In passing it is worth noting that the atheist position is a default one. It does NOT require belief. It is simply what is left when the H1 proposition fails, however this is for another time.
 
Now atheists would claim that there is no evidence for the existence of God and therefore H1 fails. (In passing one might wonder why, if there is evidence for god, that the religion that has that evidence has not therefore swallowed up all the others who clearly would be lacking in this respect. Is simply a multiplicity of religions an argument for the non-existence of God I wonder?)
 
At this point many theists go for the 'You cannot prove god does not exist' argument. This is the hypotheses above the other way around.
 
H1 - God does not exist (the atheist position)
and
H0 - God exists (the theist position)
 
The atheists just shrug and the theists jump up and down with glee saying the null hypothesis has it, God exists. The problem is that when you consider what the null hypothesis is, you have to ask one crucial question. Is the null hypothesis compatible with a stated position of no evidence.
 
Consider
H1 - Unicorns exist
and hence
H0 - Unicorn do not exist
 
Is a non-existent unicorn compatible with no evidence for the existence of unicorns? Yes it is. Now ask yourself the question if the hypotheses are reversed. Is an existing unicorn compatible with no evidence? No it isn't. Where are the hoof prints and the unicorn poop!!
 
So here we reach the crux. Is a null hypothesis of H0 - God exists compatible with no evidence for God existing. Clearly, as with the unicorn, the answer is no.
 
Atheists do not have to prove God does not exist. It is a meaningless quest because, without evidence, there is no reason or logic in believing that god does exist.

Getting nearer your belief Penderyn I think, was I confused by your wording? are you in fact an atheist?
As your last line of "you mean they believed bullshit?" must mean the bible, which is exactly what I think of it.

Penderyn wrote:

trevorw2539 wrote:

Penderyn wrote:

trevorw2539 wrote:

Penderyn wrote:

stuart torr wrote:k to Q3, Your so called messiah who is non existent  and a bible that is man written and does not tell the truth.
Comrade jesus? never heard the non existent being called comrade before?
Even you know that the bible is awash with faults, so why still believe such rubbish?
C'MON Penderyn you are running out of excuses for your argument
and even refer to the magic elements in the N.T.

Comrade Jesus, tho' confused by religious notions, knew the rich were a damned plague, and the early Church was, within the limits of the time, socialist.   You choose to believe/reject archaic crap, stuck in a time-warp.   Our job is to translate what's usable.

Isn't that rather subjective? What is your 'archaic crap'? What is your idea of what is 'usable'? If you believe what is written then 'comrade Jesus' wasn't confused by religious notions. In fact he was very clear about his religious beliefs.

No.   Gods.  Socialism.   Don't understand - obviously he was confused - everyone was back then.

The Jews were certainly not confused about their religion, and neither was Jesus, if you accept what is written about him.

You mean they believed bullshit?   Yes - they believed bullshit.   Your point?   We have to 'translate' or just posture.

To you it is bullshit. To them it was the truth. And who is to say they were/are not right? Can you prove without a shadow of doubt that 'god' does not exist? We have no 'proof' either way. All science can do is say that there is no evidence for the existence of 'god'- not that there is no 'god'. People have their own beliefs.

I don't understand your ' We have to 'translate' or just posture.

While neighbours do their best to annihilate each other in Palestine and the Ukraine, and Muslims demand that Christians convert in Iraq, by all means let's be honest enough to admit we have no solution to such problems, and instead direct ourselves to arguing about the existence of something which can neither be proved nor disproved.

Much safer. Sleep well.

Much safer from where I'm sat oftenwrong!!

Seems to me that religion is more about property than transcendence. In UK Protestant Christianity we are all free to follow our consciences and pray, or not, as we see fit. There is very little in the way of pressure to convert and it has kept pace with secular legislation. Britons never never never shall be slaves. Slavery was abolished in the 1860's and The Married Women's Property Act came into being in the 1870's. Since then marriage has been about owning property jointly.

Some other religions still keep women in the role of property, what with dowries, and so-called honour killings, under top-down hierarchies that put deities, men and power together, while women's autonomy remains out of bounds.

Belief is a powerful thing however and wars are often fought because of it, while soldiers are almost always sustained to endure through to self-sacrifice thanks to it, on every side.

All these so called gods and only one place left at the end of life, dead.

trevorw2539 wrote:To you it is bullshit. To them it was the truth. And who is to say they were/are not right? Can you prove without a shadow of doubt that 'god' does not exist? We have no 'proof' either way. All science can do is say that there is no evidence for the existence of 'god'- not that there is no 'god'. People have their  own beliefs.

I don't understand your ' We have to 'translate' or just posture.

Me.    Nobody can prove anything without a shadow of a doubt - we just go on likelihood.   We have to ask, what in practical terms was being proposed by these people, using their totally different thought-structures.   In the case of Jesus it was total social revolution and the overthrow of the old filth.   I'm for that.

stuart torr wrote:Getting nearer your belief Penderyn I think, was I confused by your wording? are you in fact an atheist?
As your last line of "you mean they believed bullshit?" must mean the bible, which is exactly what I think of it.

I think we have similar beliefs, but I don't define myself in other people's terms.   I am, I suppose, an anti-phlogistonist, if I took that theory of fire seriously enough to define myself by it!  

Penderyn.
We have a poster like you on the other forum that I go on, he just posts like you to get attention, we call him the spin cycle, he posts when far enough down the bottle, or taken enough white powder.

stuart torr wrote:Penderyn.
We have a poster like you on the other forum that I go on, he just posts like you to get attention, we call him the spin cycle, he posts when far enough down the bottle, or taken enough white powder.

Oh good. I never comment on spiteful pointless shit myself: the perpetrators don't understand sense.

Carry on posting to get attention then Penderyn.

stuart torr wrote:Carry on posting to get attention then Penderyn.

You post to keep your opinions secret, do you? Can't say I blame you, really.

I post my opinions Penderyn.
But I do not go out of my way to make them get attention like yourself.

stuart torr wrote:I post my opinions Penderyn.
But I do not go out of my way to make them get attention like yourself.

What is the point, exactly, of all this tedious blather of yours? Got piles or something?

Okay, enough of the bickering you two.

Ok Shirina.
DVD time now anyway.

Any sane person will realise that there is something or someone far more intelligent and with far greater abilities than mankind in the universe.

It is the height of stupidity to think that mankind is the only intelligent being.

Christians believe in God of the Bible and this answers all the questions for them.

There are numerous events and circumstances related in the Bible which we at the present time cannot relate to because we have no idea of what is actually being referred to and there is no need for a Christian to delve into them, Jesus came to give all mankind that followed the chance of everlasting life through believing in him and acting accordingly.

You know my thoughts on that matter P.G.

Hi Stu, yes and I pray you will change your mind.

Your prayers will go unanswered P.G.  

Ok if this super wonderful being called god existed.
Why do all these young children die who have committed no sin?
They do not die in their ones and twos though do they?
42 killed in a school massacre in America, their parents with them in some cases who believed in god? therefore committing no sins against their brothers and sisters of mankind, and helping everybody they could, why do they die so young?
Why do the people serving god ie priests commit more heinous crimes against children, instead of facing justice get shipped off to the Vatican city and hidden out of sight and beyond the law?
NOW TELL ME YOUR GOOD GOD EXISTS.

The theories regarding this subject just show a total lack of understanding of the point in question and use all kinds of theories when in fact there is more evidence to believe in God than not.

God does not kill anyone, God does not cause any illnesses, nor any other dispicable events, man is responsible for all mankinds ills, he has gone his own way and the results are there to be seen.

As for not being able to prove the existance of God, read Reverlations and Bible cronology and look at the world today.

polyglide wrote:God does not kill anyone, God does not cause any illnesses, nor any other dispicable events, man is responsible for all mankinds ills, he has gone his own way and the results are there to be seen.

As for not being able to prove the existance of God, read Reverlations and Bible cronology and look at the world today.

I really never can understand why theists will claim to believe in a deity that is omnipotent, can then claim that deity is not culpable for what they claim it has created, even though they also claim that deity is omniscient. They either don't grasp what these defining characteristics would mean if such a deity existed, or they are simply piling irrational and illogical fallacies one on top of the other in order to make the whole silly belief make some kind of sense.

How are humans responsible for suffering in the animal kingdom, like predation and parasites?

How are humans responsible for suffering that traverses hundreds of millions of years, when humans only evolved 100'000 to 150'000 years ago?

How 'could' humans be culpable for anything if all their actions and decisions are known about beforehand by an omniscient deity?

Why are you unable to use the spell checker?

The last sentence just goes to show how far some theists are prepared to lower the bar for what constitutes evidence when they desperately try to validate their beliefs. One wonders why their religion made so much fuss about faith for so long if they now claim to have evidence all along?

Oh Sheldon I just laugh out loud to myself when I read P.G.s posts, when he tries to justify the existence of a deity that has all this power supposedly, but then does not use it to save the people and children who are dying and could be saved, because they have committed no sin.

Why are you unable to use the spell checker?

Sadly, the site owners haven't provided us with that facility, even though they ask us to “avoid SMS language and spelling mistakes”:-

https://cuttingedge2.forumotion.co.uk/t391-posting-tips

Personally, if I'm not sure how to spell a word I check it in an online dictionary; there are plenty to choose from here:-

https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=online%20dictionaries

My computer usually corrects my mistakes for me Ivan.

stuart torr wrote:My computer usually corrects my mistakes for me Ivan.

You can set up your internet browser software for this. I use Google Chrome, it has a spell checker and works fine on here as well.

polyglide wrote:God does not kill anyone,

Have you read the Bible?

polyglide wrote:Hi Stu, yes and I pray you will change your mind.

If you want stu to change his mind then pray for a child that's lost a limb to grow it back by morning. If your God really existed and really wanted us to believe it'd be small coal for it to achieve this. It's no mere accident that as our understanding of the world has increased through scientific discovery, so the number of claims for 'miracles' have decreased, and whenever such claims are still made they never stand up to proper scientific scrutiny.

Says holier than thou Sheldon, but does not know all the people god killed?

I see you know my opinion on that matter of PGs Sheldon, as it would no doubt be the same as yours.

POLYGLIDE.
I hope you have not left us? I know we saw things from either side of the fence so to speak, but I hope that was not enough to make you stop posting.

Hi Stu.No, I have been having a few health problems which has restricted what I can do.

I do not blame God for them but mankind.

I have just been reading up on the whys and wherefores regarding all the earths problems and the disabled and ill in particular, I do this when I have need of reasurance, although nothing would destroy my faith.

The fact is that at the present time God cannot interfere with the workings on earth at the present time, Satan is running things in an attempt to prove God wrong.

If Go did interfere, then Satan could say he was not given the chance to prove God wrong.

regards.

I did ask on the other forums that I go on polyglide, if anybody had heard from you and opened a thread for you, as Ivan noticed you had not posted for a while, and I noticed you posted some blank posts so we thought it was probably your health I do hope you are getting better, and you will soon be back exchanging views as usual, and remember no matter what we say on the forum it is only against your post and not you as a person

Hi, Stu.

The blank posts were as a result of the computer not behaving it's self.

I made several reasonably long posts that just vanished.

Thank for your concern it is much appreciated.

I do not take anything personal, although I like to have a laugh sometimes, you have your oppinions and ideas to which you are entitled and although I respect them I do not believe therM to be true and wish you would do a little praying for guidance.

regards.

I'm concerned about a few people on the forum at the moment PG, although yourself was the main concern at the time, as you like a laugh at times would be nice to know what kind of sense of humour you have, so perhaps the odd joke may crop in the conversation. We each have our beliefs or non beliefs in my case, but if the person of whom I am concerned about is a believer then I WOULD SAY A PRAYER FOR THEM PG.

polyglide. I sent you a personal message on 14 October which I notice you haven't opened yet. You can access it from the bar at the top of the page. Thanks.

C'mon PG open Ivan's letter if past your bedtime as you are resting, check it out in the morning please as Ivan was just as concerned as myself.

Sorry, I had not realised that Ivan had in fact asked about my welfare and do realy appreciate his concern, I did not notice the posts you refer to.

At last PG.
How are you my friend?
just that you have not posted on here for a while and we miss your input.

Hi Stu,

It is a funny old world.

I have read during the past week several differing opinions regarding our world and life etc;

All from equally qualified scientists.

One said that there is no chance whatsoever of life existing in the whole universe, life on earth is just a fluke and could not be replicated.

Another that life could not, in all it's coplexities, have come about without intelligence being involved.

Then the evolutionist.

No doubt there are many others, inbetweenies.

I sometimes think that there is a missing link, not between animals and humans but between what we can understand and what is beyond our understanding.