One cannot prove anything does not exist. A basic principal of science and logic can be said as: the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. We couldn’t “see” germs until not so long ago. They still existed. Pointing and saying “see? Germs cannot exist because we have no way to detect them...” isn’t scientific. Now- near as we can figure- no one can satisfy the scientific burden of proof to prove god exists either. So what we have is an issue many people have strong hypotheses as to the existence of a god or not. Thus far we have no valid theories as to a god existing or not.
The one constant however is that science cannot price something doesn’t exist. That’s science 101. You cannot start a serious scientific process saying “I’ll prove this can’t happen...” you can prove in one billion out of one billion tries an Apple always falls when released under xyz conditions- but that doesn’t prove the Apple won’t float away- only that it’s never been seen, maybe should t be expected.
The nature of “faith” is that in the absence of proof- we believe in something. If you begin an experiment to prove something... that itself is faith. An experiment begun to discover what will happen is not the same as one begun with an expected conclusion already. That’s called bias. Faith is bias towards a pre determined conclusion. Certainty their is no god is not the same as having insufficient evidence to support a conclusion that a god exists. But in the end- one cannot use current or foreseeable science to prove or disprove a god. Those who would seek to disprove the existence of god are operating on faith.
I really want to get into a thought experiment about this, but right now, after the headache this morning has induced due to reasons beyond my control, I'm using this comment as a marker. I'm going to drink and smoke this dank fuckin' weed, catch up on a few shows, watch Zombieland: Double Tap, and possibly take a nap before I come back. That being said, the direction of my argument will be about information itself and black holes. Remember: thought experiment, not a debate.
Thank you for being apart of the first thought experiment. That wasn't a face, but it's interesting you interpreted that way; especially given the prior... algebraic structure.
before experiment 2, really analyze what I said.
I caught up on The Daily Show; either Vikings or Zombieland 2 now.
before experiment 2, really analyze what I said.
I caught up on The Daily Show; either Vikings or Zombieland 2 now.