Posted by Xavier on March 04, 1999 at 09:33:09:
In Reply to: Proving the unprovable posted by Heisenberg on March 04, 1999 at 01:36:12:
: : Wrong, wrong, wrong - the burden of proof is on you, the believer, since you are the one asserting the existence of God. See the link below. Atheism/agnosticism doesn't purport to "prove" that God doesn't exist - it is merely a lack of belief in deity.
: Fortunately for Carlos' sake, he's right on this point; by the rules of science or jurisprudence, the burden of proof would be on us, "the believers." I say "fortunately" because I think it is a truism that "you can't prove a negative," so he'd be hard pressed to prove that there is no God. It truly is the ultimate null hypothesis, isn't it? "God does not exist." But on the other hand, could we, believers, PROVE that there is a God? I shudder to think what kind of sample one would need to get a sufficiently small "p" on that one! However, I think our challenge is equally daunting. Personally, I don't think it is possible to prove that God exists with the tools that we have now. But at the same time I don't think it is necessary. I know it may sound trite to the former believers, but part of the purpose in life is to exercise faith in God even though we have no proof, "for ye receive no witness until after the trial of your faith."
: I think there are many evidences of God; for me, the most persuasive is that the evolution of ever more sophisticated and intelligent life forms seems to run counter to the second law of thermodynamics.
(Xavier)Apparently you have misunderstood either evolution, the second law, or both. Please link to http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/thermo/probability , http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html , http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html , and http://www2.uic.edu/~vuletic.html. I do not have a problem with those who choose to not accept evolution even after the evidence has been presented. I just feel that the decisions made concerning the acceptance of evolution should not be made based on misinformation. You wouldn't want me to judge the validity and value of Christianity based on misunderstandings and distortions of it, would you?
Why is there more "order" when in fact, without external influence, there should be more chaos.
(Xavier)Tremendous quantities of energy radiating to earth from the sun is not external influence???
But is that hard "proof?"
(Xavier)The natural phenomena known as evolution has a vast amount of evidence and observations supporting it, which is as much proof as you are going to get through science. In science, there are NO absolute proofs.
-Xavier