scientific reasons for believing in god?

Personal anecdotes are worthless.

Isn't it more far more likely the initial diagnosis was incomplete or in error? As opposed to appealing to an adult fairy tale with no evidence whatsoever?

Also isn't it funny - you'll accept the science when it is in your story's favour (0% chance of this and that) - but reject the science when it is not in your story's favour. That's called bias by the way.

Which is why personal anecdotes from lay people are utterly worthless.

Depends who your asking though doesn't it?

Ask a mother who was told she has 0% chance of conceiving a baby, and even less than 0% chance of delivering a healthy baby, who now has a 10 year old son what she thinks, especially when all the doctors could not explain it, she may tell you that she believes its the work of God. And IF you CANNOT (under any circumstances) provide a scientific explanation, how could you (not you personally) or anyone else deny the presence of 'God'? Or that he does in-fact have some 'direct' dealings with us or his finger on SOME scale?

There are many examples like this ^^, and while you may turn around and say they have nothing to do with God, someone else would say they are all CLEAR examples that he exists, what or who should decide who is right or wrong here? No one can decide, which is why i think this is a flawed argument

People who generally don't believe in god will do all they can to prove he doesn't exist through science, and when science cannot explain it, they turn to 'Scientific Anomaly', which is a way to basically acknowledge that something extremely unordinary has happened, which cant be 'explained', but is clearly still somehow explainable through science (somehow)

Someone who believes in god however, is happy to accept that both can (or do) exist, one doesnt have to dis-prove another, you can take your sick child to church and pray for them, while they are on the medicine that the doc has provided.

Yehhhh i'm not trying to be forum clever like you, i couldn't be bothered to gather and paste cases that science could not prove and is still yet to prove, most people with half a brain are well aware these cases exist

Your trying to be clever for no reason, your picking apart an anecdote and purposely ignoring the message behind what was said, if i had given you documented causes, what would your response have been? There have been PLENTY of documented cases that science could not explain, i could have picked one out, i chose to give an anecdote that gives the same message as a real story i could have given you, get off your high horse pleaseee

Rubbish. There is no message except the counterpoint I raised.

You are confusing not explain with appeals to fantasy.

So explain then

It CANT be anything to do with God because YOU say so, clearly

it CANT be explained by science because the scientists say so themselves

So..?

Hmm independent of what we have the freedom to believe is the non trivial nature of the world. He either does or does not exist. No, not many people would shout down a mother who had a difficult conception because... decency.

No, there are no closed case 'scientific anomalies', firstly science doesn't work like that and secondly, its because there are many rigorous, curious, competitive people who are scientists that won't take unexplained for an answer. On the other hand, when something is a miraculous act of God, believers tend rebuff any examination, often because the subject, as in your example, is a sensitive one.

What scientists? What can't be explained? And if you are going to characterise what I said then do me the courtesy of being accurate.

Someone has yet to put forward any scientific evidence that suggests a god as asked for by the OP

Surprised that the cosmological constant hasn't been brought up... It may be worth some actual debate...

Please only bring up if you are informed.

Oh, is this you saying that there have never been any scientists that have accepted or stated that something couldn't be explained? Or there have never been any 'cases' that could not be explained and quantified?

Once again, trying to be clever for no reason, if you dont know that there are things out there that cant or haven't yet been explained by science, then your an idiot. If you do know that there are, then im confused as to what exactly your trying to say?

Please, clarify yourself, make it very clear what it is exactly that you are trying to put across?

Well, who has brought forward any scientific proof that he DOESNT exist? If your going to ask one question, you may as-well ask it both ways

If i made a thread asking this question, it would probably just mirror this thread

Again, what proof are you seeking? You want pictures? An interview with him on BBC? Postcards to come through your door from him?

You are going off on a confused tangent here. Go back and read the post of yours I replied to. And then try again.

By the way, I am not some kid on here doing my GCSE's - I am a professional scientist. A real one, not a medical doctor or a psychologist.

Everything we study in science is proof of His existence.

And why do i need to go back and read the post?

This has been debunked countless times.

Debunked by who? What makes them so trustworthy? You could "debunk" anything if you were so keen on trying to belittle it.

PhD (Astrophysics), thirty years experience.Because you have lost your train of thought it seems.Let me restate something about your anecdote. Isn't it far more likely the 0%'s you mentioned were a misdiagnosis than a divine being with no evidence for his/her existence personally intervened?

Yes, and as i originally said, you were trying to be clever for no reason,

If i had brought forward a documented case, a 'miracle' so to speak, that science DID NOT have an answer for, how would you have also picked that apart? Would your 30 years of experience make you more qualified to tell us why these miracles happened? More qualified than previous 'experts' who had also looked at these events? Or would you have simply had no choice but to go with ' urhm, well '

Picking apart an anecdote that is being used to give an example, context, imagery, is childish, its the kind of thing i expect a kid to

There are extraordinary events and documented cases that (evidence would suggest) CANNOT be explained by science, and therefore are dubbed as 'miracles' (gods work) OR scientific anomalies - which effectively destroy's the god argument and leaves no room open to the idea that there is a God, and he does intervene on this earth and causes random and amazing (or horrible..) things to happen.

If you cant explain them, no, it doesnt mean there is a God, but if you CANT explain them, then HOW can you be CERTAIN that there is no God?

One should not need a reason to be clever. One is clever or one isn't. I happen to be such a one.


You can't bring one up because there is no such thing as a miracle. You can bring hand wavy anecdotes like you did up but they are worthless to examination by their very nature.


No the childish thing is providing such rubbish to begin with.


Except no one ever manages to bring such a thing up that is not unexplained except do to its very tenuous evidences or observation.



You haven't provided anything of note. Look, I can tell that you aren't educated to a high level but you should really stop digging holes.