OK so maybe science might be right about evolution, the age of the earth, medicine, absence of witches, children's inability to fight in wars,....etc. but why can't it prove God exists.
203591
Science deals with the natural world.  It cannot prove the existence of the supernatural.\n\nHowever... science, rational thought, and logic can disprove the existence of some god or gods.  For example, Zeus and his cronies were supposed to hang out on Mount Olympus.  We can concretely say that Mount Olympus is not the home of the gods.  We have disproved the greek gods.  Likewise, you can logic and reason to disprove the christian god.  However... most people have a blind spot towards this information.  That's fine.  You can believe in whatever you want... provided you are not a danger to yourself or others.
671455
As you ask in the science category: No, not in the scientific world.\n\nThere is no scientific theory that needs a god to explain something, and no evidence for the existence of a god is found in any experiment.\n\nI know that there are religious scientists, but they differ between their religion and their work. Religion can't be a part of science, because we have strict rules about scientific work. Experiments must be reproducible and theories have to be falsifiable: Religion doesn't fit both criteria, that's the difference between \ndeductive logic and pure belief whithout asking.\n\nAlthough in America creationists currently have a come back in disguise as pseudo-scientific intelligent design, this is not a scientific theory and just an USA related problem with christian fundamentalism and the education system.
100242
I think it's so funny that so-called scholars believe in evolution.  I say let them believe, that just shows how stupid they are.  If evolution were true, I ask who caused it to start, I would still give God the credit.  If there was a "big bang", then it was God that caused it.
47004
>>>>Is God real or did evolution acualy happen?\n\nWe can’t know whether God is real or not. There is no objective evidence for the existence of God, the only evidence exists inside the minds of people. Since gods (and there are more than one) are supernatural and lack any objective evidence they fall outside the scope of science.\n\nDid evolution actually happen? Yes, that’s one thing that all the evidence agrees on.\n>>>>>I seen a story on the news and it was staying how religion in school was not taught because of the evolution therory.\n\nNo, you didn’t. You misunderstood the story on the news.  \n\nReligion is not taught in public schools because the US Constitution says that it can not be taught there. It violates the separation clause. It has nothing to do with the theory of evolution. It has everything to do with that the law quite clearly states.\n\nWhat the story would have actually said was that some attempts to teach religious beliefs as an alternative to evolution are still illegal and unconstitutional because it is still the teaching of religious beliefs.
659084
Evolution is NOT science. There is nothing scientific about it. It is a religion. You cannot prove that we came from nothing. Its not even possible. You cannot create nor distroy matter, thats physics. So then how did all this "matter" around us get here. There has to be a creator. The animals may have different variations but they're still the same kind. Everything comes after its own kind. Same with people, there are tall, short, skinny, big. You'll never get a bannana from a fish. The reason you say the earth is billions of years old is because you think if you give it enough time it might happen. God created everything.
577933
I think most people who believe in Christianity also understand that science has a part in the process as well. Thus, while God may have created the Earth and all, there is still a process of evolution that occurs.
139599
GOD!!! its the only reason that never changes! evolution has changed many times && no one has been able to prove evolution right. but read the bible!! theres your eyewitness
183227
Thank you I am so glad someone asked that question. You are so right on that. If you think about it, yeah evolution is scientifically proven so there's no denying that. But if you are arguing on the side of creationism than you have to realize that there really is no denying science. You can't deny a fact such as gravity exists. It's just there and no bible can disprove that. So if you combine both theories there shouldnt be an ragument at all. God created the universe; that's the explanation for the "big boom" and then he created humans. Humans and all other cretures of the universe naturally evolved from his creation. Now how hard is it to accept the fact that that's probably the most logical explanation out there?
157148
It is not possible to say 'God exists' or 'God does not exist'. There is simply no proof either way.\nThose that say 'God exists' must at some point take a leap of faith.\nThose that say 'God does not exist' must make a similar leap of faith towards scientific / empirical proofs.\n\nI don't know about 'being sure' but I tend to think that almost all the misery caused in this world is due to human choice and free will. Unless I'm mistaken, there is pretty much all the resource, food and know-how on this planet to keep us all well, fed, warm, housed etc. if it weren't for the inherant greed and desire within us all (not being 'holier than thou' here - don't see me selling the laptop to put food in a starving African - just admitting my failings!) Maszlow's heirarchy of human needs is a good starting point for understanding what we need / what we want and why we choose to proceed upwards as we attain our needs.\n\nPerhaps the 'garden of eden' is a very good analogy for what happens when we have free will. Without it all God's graces were given, as soon as human's chose the 'forbidden' path from their own free will, it all started going wrong.\nBit harsh to blame God for what we have chosen as a race to do with the gifts of creation / evolution?
573637
Well, I think so.  I'm a biologist who accepts the fact that evolution occurred, but I don't use that to try to prove that God doesn't exist.  I'm also a born-again Christian who doesn't doubt a single word in the Bible.  Evolution is nothing.  I frankly don't see what the big deal about it is.  The real enemy is Materialism- those pseudoscientists who think the physical universe is all that exists.  That's not the same thing as evolultion.  One can still believe in God and simply think evolution was a tool He used at times.  But you can't be a Materialist and still believe in God at all.  People should understand that they're disputing about a worldview, not about facts.
467282
I completely agree with you. I've done my research and evolution in reality has not been proven. It is the media that propagates the myth of evolution, even brainwashing children with pictures of monkey-men in textbooks to do it. They've even go so far as to make whole skeletal structures of out of small bone fragments in order to provide "physical proof" of evolution, like with "Piltdown Man", a fraud  that was not discovered as a fraud until 40 years after it was made. It's a big lie, one of the greatest frauds in history. Even Darwin said, "If evolution has occurred, where are the missing links?"\nBelief in God and science is completely compatible. In fact, the Bible has a lot of scientific foreknowledge that "scientists" didn't even discover until centuries later, even just in the last century when it was right in front of them all along.\nThe Bible says it was God who made everything, and that it was God who established laws that hold everything in its place. Hence to see science for what it really is is to see the fingerprint of God.
565404
Firstly, thanks for asking this question.  I've probably answered it about twenty times already, but i think you're the first person I've seen with an actual interest in the answer.\n\nYou're asking two questions here.\n1) What proof do we have that God does not exist?\n2) Isn't evolution just a theory and not a fact?\n\nBoth of these questions touch on a more fundamental question:\n"Why do atheists believe what they believe?"  I'd like to address that question first, because it will make it easier to answer the other two.\n\nI can't speak for all atheists (I'm actually agnostic), but many attempt to base their beliefs in scientific reasoning.  Modern science is based on the facts that human knowledge is limited and human perception is faulty.  All the tools that scientists use to discern the truth (falsifiablility, replication, lab controls, measuring devices, statistical analysis, the scientific method of inquiry, etc.) are all designed specifically to limit errors in human perception.  \n\nNonetheless, mistakes are made and scientists are often wrong.  That's why scientific belief is pliable.  You may hear people talk about "margin of believe" and "index of suspicion".  Basically, these terms represent the degree of belief, which varies with experience.  For instance, I have a high index of suspicion that the sun will rise tomorrow.  There is the slightest possibility that it won't.  Based on historical records, mathematical calculations, and what we know of the natural world, it's a good bet that it will.  Similarly, I have a high margin of disbelieve in the theory that aliens abduct cows on Earth.  There is a very small possibility, but it's very unlikely.\n\nWhen we consider a belief's worth, we're really just raising or lowering our margin of disbelief.  Generally speaking, most beliefs are given an "a priori" possibility of 50%.  Evidence that does not support the belief (it fails to conform to theories that we already have good reasons to believe, it is internally inconsistent, it violates known natural laws, it fails to explain certain phenomenon within its scope, it doesn't make accurate predictions, etc.) raises our margin of disbelief.  Evidence that supports the belief (it makes accurate predictions, it's reproducible, it supports existing theories and known natural laws, etc.) lowers our margin of disbelief.   Once the margin of disbelief is high enough, we can treat the belief as an untruth for practical purposes.  (Bigfoot ate my baby.)  If our margin of disbelief becomes low enough, we can treat the belief as fact.  (My car still has gas in its tank).  Basically, not all beliefs are created equal.  We should have more faith in beliefs with lots of evidential support, and less faith in beliefs with little evidence to back them up.  Conversely, we should doubt beliefs that the available evidence doesn't support.\n\nContrary to what many atheists say, it is possible to prove a negative and prove negative existence.  Assume that I state that you have no quarters in your pockets, then force you to turn out your pockets.  If there are no quarters in there, I have proven (within the limits of perception) negative existence.  The problems with disproving the existence of God are matters of definition and perception.  I can say that there is no god in your pocket and show it to you.  You could reasonably respond that God is invisible and we can't see him.  It all depends on how we define "God" and how powerful our ability to "see" him is.\n\nSpeaking specifically of the the Judeo-Christian god, we can say that it is very unlikely that it exists.  The existence of an omnipotent intelligence defies the Law of Conservation of Energy.  The concept that the universe was created out of nothing defies the Law of Conservation of Matter.  These laws, together, establish the basis for all of physic
185522
As it seems this question has raised yet another debate, I'd like to add my 2cents. As the father of paleoboy, and a Christian, I believe I have raised my son well. Because I have not fallen into the ignorance, as I will call it, of pre-empting God. Evolution is merely a theory, man should  not be assumed to be included in this factor. In fact, there exists more questions  of man's progress than proof of any evolution. \nThe animals however, and lower life, could have been designed by God in many numerous ways. Who are we to question the means, or claim to know as to how God works? He works, as we know, in mysterious ways! Could he not have in fact, by design, created species that could evolve and adapt to earth changes, if for no other reason, to allow clues behind for the event of man to discover, to weed out those that would choose to use this information, to disprove His existence?\nTo claim we have all the answers to the mysteries of God is to fall into ignorance as Christians. I back up my son's answer, as an open, unquestioning mind as to the works of God. Paleontology is a science, based on evidence, and a great deal of theory, which is always subject to change with newly discovered evidence.
452459
I disbelieve on the grounds of lack of evidence so short of proof being forthcoming I couldn't say I believed God existed. Convictions or subjective opinions don't come into it-it's purely down to a lack of valid evidence.
584539
Science does NOT state that non-believers are 100% right! There have been and currently are plenty of scientists that have proved that creation is real. You do know that Darwin/big bang are theories right? You are familiar with the definition of theory correct? IF you answered yes, than you must know also that 97% of scientists world wide CANNOT explain how the eye was formed and they have admitted that there is virtually no way that it could have evolved right?
48195
Well, this is a touchy question...God or science. It is also a complicated question, but I will do my best.\n\nThe thing about faith, is if you don't have it, you don't understand it, but if you have it then no explanation is neccessary. In other words, people of faith do not need proof nor do they care to learn, they simply believe in God. People of science need proof of what they believe in. Scientists believe in the atom because they can see it, they can study it. Religious followers do not need to see God to believe in him. \n\nSince man could first walk upright we have been searching for a reason that we are here. Some people turn to God to make their search simple and refreshing. Others turn to science in order to seek a more rational explanation. \n\nReligion is nothing more than a very comforting way of going about your life. God put you here for a reason, God will protect you, God will forgive you, God will give you eternal happiness, and so on are just ways of controlling the weaker 96% of the worlds population. \n\nOn your question, science has not proven that religion is fraud, but it has proved that certain things mentioned in the Bible are untrue. This is easy because the Bible is not a historical record, it is a collection of stories that were passed down by mouth for generations before ever written down. As an example, the Bible says the world was created in six days, (remember, the seventh day was for rest not creation), well, was that six Earth days, or extra-solar days? A lot of what is in the Bible is relative. \n\nNow, although science has proven that a great many things in the religious world are not factual, science has yet to prove that God does not exist. That is one thing that science may never be able to prove...but just to be fair, Religion will also never be able to prove that science is wrong.\n\nI realize that I have put a negative window on religion and I wish to correct this. I myself, am Atheist...I have no belief in any God, I simply believe that no God exists, and I am fine with that. Many others have a need to believe in God. They feel good believing that there is an all-knowing and omnipotent being watching over them and taking care of them and guiding them, I have no problems with that in fact I encourage that.\n\nAlthough I am Atheist, I do read the Bible because the Bible does not only teach about God, it teaches you a good way to live your life and how to be a good person, it teaches morals, values, discipline, and responsibility. If you feel you need to believe in God, then you should, if you are comfortable not believing in God, then go ahead. It is all about personal convictions and preferences. Believe or dis-believe in whatever, or whoever you chose and let others do the same.\n\nI will end this with a quote, although I am not sure who said it. "If God did not exist, then it would be neccessary for man to create Him"
256740
Where most religious people think to see "proof" of God, an objective person will only see something that usually can be explained by smthg else. The point is that the average human is not much aware of modern science (like cutting edge cosmology, quantum physics, abiogenesis, and the like) and just ignore the many possibilities for other explanations alternative to "God". \n\nThere is no such thing as "scientific proof" of the existence of God. No matter what religious people say.\nWe don´t really need the "God theory" to explain things in this universe. They can be explained by more conventional means. \n\nThe problem is that science is just too young compared to culture and tradition. \nMankind, my friend, is still at its childhood, and it still loves fairytales when going to bed.