Science seeks to prove the existence of God. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_a0oFcomog"]Proving God Exist (History Channel) (2012) - YouTube
The atheists response.... http://www.democraticunderground.com/12309931 Notice they didn't bother to check it out before they condemned it.
Atheists and theists alike are hard wired to find their good, god equals that which we invoke as good and is the essence of our devotional nature.
Minute 41 says that Moses was high on magic mushrooms when he talked to God on Mount Sinai. Minute 55 says that the God gene makes peoples brain work different.
It is common knowledge that drugs are used to feel closer to the divine. The way drugs distort the mind and one's perceptions, it is to be expected that one would experience hallucinations. Yes, defectively.
First of all, I'm not watching an hour and a half video. Second you, and they, need to define what is meant by God. Third, a gene that provides a spiritual propensity, if it exists, is not proof of a God or Gods.
The reason I started this thread, is because an atheist claimed that scientists are not trying to prove the existence of God.
Oh yeah, the history channel is the pinnacle of meticulous science! There's good science and there's bad science. Good science has no agendas aside from knowledge itself. Bad science has agendas, money, power, fame, religion... A "PRIEST-SCIENTIST", CLEARLY HAS A BIASED AGENDA! There's far more BS (Bad Science) to be found than genuine good science. Probably around the same ratio as simpletons to intellectuals. For intelligent people who can pick out the difference between BS and GS, your video does more to reinforce evidence against God than prove God.
First of all, it's not MY video. Secondly, you can't appoint yourself God, by dictating what is "BS and GS." That's what the fanatic religious nuts do too.
It's not being God, it's called REASONING. I'm sure you have no idea of what REASONING is about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PDZTveY4uQ"]Creationism by Lewis Black - YouTube 3:35 "The problem is when you try too hard to apply science to religion, both come off looking ridiculous" ... and you come off looking like a DUMBASS! - Depends how you look at it. Religion and spirituality are at the very least coping mechanisms. There is logic that explains how religious tendencies are beneficial to the survival of social groups. Where this gene seems to currently dominate our species it becomes we atheists who are defective. However, all steps in evolution are really defects. They are rare mutations that happen to become beneficial under certain conditions or new environmental changes. A spiritual/religious gene may have been beneficial to primitive societies while it is now a hindrance to advanced society. Unfortunately evolutionary advancements usually require genocidal, near extinction level events to transpire.
Lets face it, if scientists, whosoever they might be had either proven or disproven the existence of God, it would be big news, and would have percolated out from youtube into the mass media. IMHO this is precisely the kind of garbage that gets both science and God a bad name.
No, it's morons like atheists that want to give God a bad name. And just because science tries to prove God doesn't make it garbage, it's the holier than thou dumb ass that calls it garbage that is. "Respect those that seek the truth. Doubt those that say they know it."
Seems to me that theists are equally as eager to give science a bad name. Calling atheists "morons" isnt really doing your case any good at all.Many are actually more intelligent than those who blindly believe in religious dogma.Some are undoubtedly morons, but so are many who believe. "Doubt those who say they know" Well, doubting these scientists would surely be in accord with that. Another angle. If God exists, in whatever form or formless state, it may be that God doesnt want humans to be able to prove Gods existence. If God wanted us to know for sure that God exists, one might assume God would not be reliant on dubious scientific exeriments to get the message across.
