Religion

Sal316

(3,373 posts)

18. *bzzt* Nope, that's not how it works.

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 03:59 PM

Dec 2011

Tests are run all the time without having to provide evidence first.

For example, being a chemist, I've personally tested for things like:

- Chlorides in water
- Impurities in materials
- Contaminants in water/wastewater/reactor cooling water, etc.

...without having any evidence they exist in the medium I've tested. Yet there is a valid methodology to verify whether or not it/they exist in the medium being tested. These methodologies all have known accuracy, precision, repeatability, and influences that could cause false positive/negative/erroneous results.

Additionally, scientists develop test methodologies based on hypotheses, and not actual evidence, all the time.

You are free to claim there "is no scientific evidence that there is a God", but without actual science to back it up it's only a statement of faith.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

86 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Can you give an example of an argument against religion that is ... [View all] Boojatta Dec 2011 OP

Sure. There is zero scientific evidence that there is a god. n/t Scuba Dec 2011 #1

If there's zero scientific evidence that Goldbach's conjecture is false ... Boojatta Dec 2011 #4

And, as the corollary to that: All arguments for the existence MarkCharles Dec 2011 #5

If there's zero scientific evidence, then there is a test methodology, right? Sal316 Dec 2011 #6

that makes no sense. bowens43 Dec 2011 #8

That's not what was requested. Sal316 Dec 2011 #10

Where there is no evidence there is simply that. Your mind is begging other questions. If you.. MarkCharles Dec 2011 #11

You prove my point. Sal316 Dec 2011 #13

You missed the point. One is a statement of fact, the other MarkCharles Dec 2011 #14

And I'm simply asking for the facts to back up the claim. Sal316 Dec 2011 #16

Would you like to provide the scientific evidence for God? laconicsax Dec 2011 #20

I'm not the one that made the definitive claim. Sal316 Dec 2011 #35

"I'm not contesting that there's no scientific evidence" laconicsax Dec 2011 #43

Never said there was. Sal316 Dec 2011 #46

Why should I substantiate a claim I never made? laconicsax Dec 2011 #48

A statement of fact is now "obfuscation"? Good one! MarkCharles Dec 2011 #26

How is something unproven a verified fact? Sal316 Dec 2011 #29

How, it is antithetical to the principles and current levels of revelations of science MarkCharles Dec 2011 #32

Got data? Sal316 Dec 2011 #36

The test methodology is the same, just provide the evidence first... cleanhippie Dec 2011 #15

*bzzt* Nope, that's not how it works. Sal316 Dec 2011 #18

That's circular logic, sal, and it's worthless. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #22

How is it circular? Sal316 Dec 2011 #28

Seriously? cleanhippie Dec 2011 #41

Ok, let me type slower. Sal316 Dec 2011 #47

Sal, I feel you are being obtuse. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #50

"Science actually requires there to BE something to test" tama Dec 2011 #64

The problem is that the examples you use have tried and tested methodologies... Humanist_Activist Dec 2011 #53

A question tama Dec 2011 #76

If god is just a matter of definition, it becomes meaningless... Humanist_Activist Dec 2011 #78

Semantic games tama Dec 2011 #79

I would, more or less, agree with Smolin's definition... Humanist_Activist Dec 2011 #84

Zeilinger tama Dec 2011 #86

If your considerations for the existence or non-existence of deity extend no farther humblebum Dec 2011 #21

so, just use your imagination? lazarus Dec 2011 #23

Edison "imagined" a light bulb. So what's your point? humblebum Dec 2011 #24

Not Really, Sir The Magistrate Dec 2011 #30

Thank you for the clarification and making me realize that the potential value of humblebum Dec 2011 #31

Your 'What's This Glow Hover'ng In My Mind? I Shall Call It Light Bulb!' Version, Sir, Needed A Kick The Magistrate Dec 2011 #37

Did I ever say that it was not? We live in a material world. However, humblebum Dec 2011 #39

The Leap Between 'Accepting the Possibility' And 'Declaring As Fact', Sir, Breaks Many Bones The Magistrate Dec 2011 #42

I can definitely see that you are not in the "other ways of knowing" group. What you just humblebum Dec 2011 #44

But It Is Exactly the Proposition You Suggest, Sir The Magistrate Dec 2011 #45

And that is exactly where you are wrong. If there was 100% ojectivity for every idea ever conceived humblebum Dec 2011 #57

Not Worth the Efort At Four In the Morning, Sir The Magistrate Dec 2011 #58

Yes I can see by the spelling in your subject line that it is humblebum Dec 2011 #59

That's what Aristotle tama Dec 2011 #65

What you are talking about is illusion... Humanist_Activist Dec 2011 #54

Define real :) tama Dec 2011 #66

Something that can be indepently verified to exist or occur... Humanist_Activist Dec 2011 #75

Using multiple sources of evidence tama Dec 2011 #80

Anecdotal evidence is not data.. Fumesucker Dec 2011 #2

Yes, but much of that so-called "data" rises no higher than being hypothetical. humblebum Dec 2011 #25

? Fumesucker Dec 2011 #27

Anecdotal evidence is data. tama Dec 2011 #67

Astronomy is a science that produces hard data and yet it has no laboratory. Fumesucker Dec 2011 #71

Granted, observatories and LHC tama Dec 2011 #72

It was at one time possible to do cutting edge astronomical research with the naked eye.. Fumesucker Dec 2011 #74

Ancedotal evidence can't be repeatedly observed or independently verified... Humanist_Activist Dec 2011 #77

Lab experiments tama Dec 2011 #82

Its not necessarily philosophical, but practical... Humanist_Activist Dec 2011 #83

Those are valid tama Dec 2011 #85

Can you give an example of an argument for religion that is... comipinko Dec 2011 #3

there is no evidence supporting the existence of gods. bowens43 Dec 2011 #7

Arguement "against" religion? deacon_sephiroth Dec 2011 #9

anyone?...anyone? deacon_sephiroth Dec 2011 #61

I like the little boy tama Dec 2011 #68

Re dogmas and intolerable presumption Boojatta Dec 2011 #81

The kind of god being argued about here is irrelevant to most saras Dec 2011 #12

And you know the gender and name of these forces how? cleanhippie Dec 2011 #17

It is a joke from hippy-counter culture. ZombieHorde Dec 2011 #40

Have you been tama Dec 2011 #69

shifting the burden lazarus Dec 2011 #19

Can you give me an argument against the Invisible Pink Flying Unicorn uriel1972 Dec 2011 #33

The Easter Bunny told me last week that there is no god. lindysalsagal Dec 2011 #34

I can. ZombieHorde Dec 2011 #38

Whoa major brain spasm uriel1972 Dec 2011 #49

How do you get "false" out of "detrimental"? Boojatta Dec 2011 #51

Um where did I say it was false? uriel1972 Dec 2011 #55

I got one specifically for you Eliminator Dec 2011 #52

The OP said an argument against religion uriel1972 Dec 2011 #56

What's the difference? Eliminator Dec 2011 #60

I don't contend that willfull ignorance is a good thing, uriel1972 Dec 2011 #62

The Prince of peace, the end of strife and war and suffering....Hasn't happened, yet. lindysalsagal Dec 2011 #63

Can you give an example of an argument against the Magic Sandwich that is... laconicsax Dec 2011 #70

And tama Dec 2011 #73