Science Refutes God

[United States Kingdom]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7vEB6FXtbs

Firstly, I would like to state the latest months for me have been hard because I have been having an internal conflict. The conflict is basically this. Does God exist or does he not. After doing research, and listening to some credible arguments, and debates such as this(I would like to state this is a credible debate because we have two people from the same side arguing against each other). I have been known to support God, and fight with countless NSG players over whether God exists, and he doesn't. Guess what. I have decided to join the atheist side.

That however isn't my point. My point is I want to see what the general NSG opinion is. This isn't a does God exist debate thread, it is does Science refutes God. I personally think that science does but I will live it to the experts in the video to show you that it does.

My thread is different from the thread "Does God exist?". The four experts arguing for each side even state that the Science Refutes God debate is different from Does God exist.

I just want to see the general NSG opinion, and I hope a debate is created from this so that people can defend their opinion because if you aren't willing to allow someone to question your believe, chances are that your belief is wrong.

[Wizlandia]

Depends on what you define by "refutes". Does science disprove god, no. Does science refute the idea that god is necessary to understanding the world, yes.

[Wisconsin9]

I see no compelling evidence one way or another.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Science cannot disprove God. Science is a toolbox for which we ascertain truths about the universe (and perhaps beyond) but God is not something it can prove or disprove.

[Mike the Progressive]

well if its a youtube video

[-Ebola-]

It depends on what you mean by "God." Science refutes some conceptions of God.

[Myrensis]

Science does not and cannot refute God because Science cannot account for God. God is not measurable, or testable, and doesn't even really have a concrete definition (depends on which God and who you're talking too).

Science can and frequently does refute specific claims about God, when those claims are actually about observable and testable phenomena.

[Valloria]

Science has stronger evidence, but if it can be disproved, so be it.

[Aleckandor REDUX]

Science can lead people to a personal conclusion - be it gnostic or agnostic in nature - that perhaps God or any other supreme being upon which all moral authority originates does not exist or is not present in our lives, but I don't think science does (or ever will) truly and totally 100% answer refute the existence of God or anything similar, at least not from our current level of understanding or cognition. But that's what the scientific method is all about, if new information conflicts with the old and is consistently found to be true, then that new information becomes the new standard.

[The Alma Mater]

Science does not and cannot refute God because Science cannot account for God. God is not measurable, or testable, and doesn't even really have a concrete definition (depends on which God and who you're talking too).

Science can and frequently does refute specific claims about God, when those claims are actually about observable and testable phenomena.

This, exactly.

Science can not disprove the existence of God.
Science can disprove specific religious claims, like Noahs flood, the earth being older than the sun or humans being descended from armpit hair.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Science does not and cannot refute God because Science cannot account for God. God is not measurable, or testable, and doesn't even really have a concrete definition (depends on which God and who you're talking too).

Science can and frequently does refute specific claims about God, when those claims are actually about observable and testable phenomena.

This, exactly.

Science can not disprove the existence of God.
Science can disprove specific religious claims, like Noahs flood, the earth being older than the sun or humans being descended from armpit hair.

^

[Wizlandia]

Science cannot disprove God. Science is a toolbox for which we ascertain truths about the universe (and perhaps beyond) but God is not something it can prove or disprove.

Depends on ones definition of "god". So long as god is something that is claimed to influence/have influenced the natural world (and also specified in what way), science can refute/disprove it.

In here I use the word "disprove" meaning to be that science has shown, with evidence that the claim is impossible. I do not mean the mathematical use of the word "disprove" that only uses logical reasonings to arrive at its conclusions.

[United Marxist Nations]

How could it?

[Sun Wukong]

How could it?

Babelfish.

[United Marxist Nations]

Science cannot disprove God. Science is a toolbox for which we ascertain truths about the universe (and perhaps beyond) but God is not something it can prove or disprove.

Depends on ones definition of "god". So long as god is something that is claimed to influence/have influenced the natural world (and also specified in what way), science can refute/disprove it.

In here I use the word "disprove" meaning to be that science has shown, with evidence that the claim is impossible. I do not mean the mathematical use of the word "disprove" that only uses logical reasonings to arrive at its conclusions.

No, it can't, because the god of, say, the Abrahamic religions, is all-powerful and could very well have created the laws of the universe themselves. Thus, you can't disprove that he influences the world, because you cannot separate him from it. For example, evolution doesn't do anything to address the question of a god, because said god could very well have created (or at least put in place the means for) evolution.

[United Marxist Nations]

How could it?

Babelfish.

[Wizlandia]

Depends on ones definition of "god". So long as god is something that is claimed to influence/have influenced the natural world (and also specified in what way), science can refute/disprove it.

In here I use the word "disprove" meaning to be that science has shown, with evidence that the claim is impossible. I do not mean the mathematical use of the word "disprove" that only uses logical reasonings to arrive at its conclusions.

No, it can't, because the god of, say, the Abrahamic religions, is all-powerful and could very well have created the laws of the universe themselves. Thus, you can't disprove that he influences the world, because you cannot separate him from it. For example, evolution doesn't do anything to address the question of a god, because said god could very well have created (or at least put in place the means for) evolution.

My comments above specify that science can disprove god so long as god has a claim on the natural world. This claim on the natural world must of course also be testable.

I do not quite understand this sentence

Thus, you can't disprove that he influences the world, because you cannot separate him from it.

Perhaps you care to clarify more?

[United Marxist Nations]

No, it can't, because the god of, say, the Abrahamic religions, is all-powerful and could very well have created the laws of the universe themselves. Thus, you can't disprove that he influences the world, because you cannot separate him from it. For example, evolution doesn't do anything to address the question of a god, because said god could very well have created (or at least put in place the means for) evolution.

My comments further above specify that science can disprove god so long as god has a claim on the natural world. This claim on the natural world must of course also be testable.

If the claim is that god influences the natural world, then it cannot be testable under any circumstance.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7vEB6FXtbs

Firstly, I would like to state the latest months for me have been hard because I have been having an internal conflict. The conflict is basically this. Does God exist or does he not. After doing research, and listening to some credible arguments, and debates such as this(I would like to state this is a credible debate because we have two people from the same side arguing against each other). I have been known to support God, and fight with countless NSG players over whether God exists, and he doesn't. Guess what. I have decided to join the atheist side.

That however isn't my point. My point is I want to see what the general NSG opinion is. This isn't a does God exist debate thread, it is does Science refutes God. I personally think that science does but I will live it to the experts in the video to show you that it does.

My thread is different from the thread "Does God exist?". The four experts arguing for each side even state that the Science Refutes God debate is different from Does God exist.

I just want to see the general NSG opinion, and I hope a debate is created from this so that people can defend their opinion because if you aren't willing to allow someone to question your believe, chances are that your belief is wrong.

Science may be able to refute specific claims regarding God, but not the existence of God.

[Wizlandia]

My comments further above specify that science can disprove god so long as god has a claim on the natural world. This claim on the natural world must of course also be testable.

If the claim is that god influences the natural world, then it cannot be testable under any circumstance.

Why?

Example: Genesis says that the earth is less than 10,000 years old (and that god made it). Science has proven that it is not. Therefore, the God in Genesis is disproven.

[Wizlandia]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7vEB6FXtbs

Firstly, I would like to state the latest months for me have been hard because I have been having an internal conflict. The conflict is basically this. Does God exist or does he not. After doing research, and listening to some credible arguments, and debates such as this(I would like to state this is a credible debate because we have two people from the same side arguing against each other). I have been known to support God, and fight with countless NSG players over whether God exists, and he doesn't. Guess what. I have decided to join the atheist side.

That however isn't my point. My point is I want to see what the general NSG opinion is. This isn't a does God exist debate thread, it is does Science refutes God. I personally think that science does but I will live it to the experts in the video to show you that it does.

My thread is different from the thread "Does God exist?". The four experts arguing for each side even state that the Science Refutes God debate is different from Does God exist.

I just want to see the general NSG opinion, and I hope a debate is created from this so that people can defend their opinion because if you aren't willing to allow someone to question your believe, chances are that your belief is wrong.

Science may be able to refute specific claims regarding God, but not the existence of God.

Unless the existence of some god is dependent on the specific claim regarding god.

[Blakk Metal]

If God doesn't exist, how can He be refuted?

[United Marxist Nations]

If the claim is that god influences the natural world, then it cannot be testable under any circumstance.

Why?

Example: Genesis says that the earth is less than 10,000 years old (and that god made it). Science has proven that it is not. Therefore, the God in Genesis is disproven.

Genesis is entirely metaphorical. Even in the names: Adam = Hebrew word for man, Eve = Hebrew word for woman. It also strongly implies that there are more than one person and that one "day" is really a massive amount of time. Also, Genesis never says the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, that was some guy during the Reformation IIRC.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

If the claim is that god influences the natural world, then it cannot be testable under any circumstance.

Why?

Example: Genesis says that the earth is less than 10,000 years old (and that god made it). Science has proven that it is not. Therefore, the God in Genesis is disproven.

Genesis never says that.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Science may be able to refute specific claims regarding God, but not the existence of God.

Unless the existence of some god is dependent on the specific claim regarding god.

Well, of course. If you say "God lives on Mount Olympus in a mansion surrounded by a lake of fire", and no such lake, mansion, or God is found after a thorough search of Mount Olympus, then you can discard that conception of God. However, I can't imagine how science would prove or disprove the existence of some intelligence that exists either as part of the universe or behind the curtains of it, creating it, pulling strings towards a desired outcome.