[Bored chemist]

I reckon God is allowing a slow thinning of the population to give humankind time to adjust to a new reality. The slow thinning is cell phone radiation degrading immune systems, increasing infertility and leading to a lower life expectancy.

Except that phones don't cause those things.

[CliveG]

I reckon God is allowing a slow thinning of the population to give humankind time to adjust to a new reality. The slow thinning is cell phone radiation degrading immune systems, increasing infertility and leading to a lower life expectancy.

Except that phones don't cause those things.

In order for the thinning to take place, people must not realize the danger. So Bored Chemist is helping God by telling others that cell phones are quite safe and that those who claim otherwise are nutters. Good job - keep going.

The thinning is selective also. The radiation affects the weak, the sick and the elderly most of all. The strongest will survive. The smartest (those who realize the dangers) will also survive.

And as a by by-product, religion and belief in a higher power always thrive in times of pandemics. Watch what happens as it dawns on the population that something is causing the problem. Interesting times ahead.

[PmbPhy]

Can science prove God exists?

No. Something that is important to understand is that science is not about proving things. Science has never actually proved any theory in fact. It's just not geared to do anything like that. Science is about observing nature and coming up with theories that can be used to make predictions about the phenomena it was designed to observe, i.e. to "explain." Religion is much worse at this, infinitely worse in fact. No religion on  Earlh can prove God exists. All religions postulate that God exists and not one of them have a good reason for doing so. Does God exist? Maybe. Keep seeking - That's the best thing to do.

[CliveG]

Can science prove God exists?

No. Something that is important to understand is that science is not about proving things. Science has never actually proved any theory in fact. It's just not geared to do anything like that. Science is about observing nature and coming up with theories that can be used to make predictions about the phenomena it was designed to observe, i.e. to "explain." Religion is much worse at this, infinitely worse in fact. No religion on  Earlh can prove God exists. All religions postulate that God exists and not one of them have a good reason for doing so. Does God exist? Maybe. Keep seeking - That's the best thing to do.

Quite right about observations and theory. Wrong about religion. Religions that have endured and matured are the ones that have theories based on the observations of prophets. The bad theories such as the Roman and Norse good failed. My observations are spiritual in nature. You cannot use machines and devices to get repeatable observations of a communication from God. When enough people have experiences with a common thread it filters out the noise of mistake and fraud. My observations explain the Prime Cause, the apparent Intelligent Design, and the mysterious happenings involving psychic events. Try to find a contradiction in my theory. Science has no answer at all and simply says it does not know. People trash religions because of the problems in the rituals and because they need to be updated. That does not mean that the basic tenets of an Intelligent and Good powerful Spirit known as Good is false. Most religions accept the concept of a soul, and of Spirits with power such as Jesus or the Hindu gods. Unbreakable laws of physics cannot explain my experiences.

[CliveG]

Trying to use my cell phone. Good should be God in two places. I see that the auto edit changed it here as well.

[PmbPhy]

Clive - I disagree strongly. But I don't wish to discuss religion. I just wanted to respond to the question posed and put my two cents in. I never would have done so had I not had a strong grasp of world religions. I studied them throughout my lifetime. Especially in college and my won self study. Read the Bible twice cover to cover very carefully. Will repeat a few more times.

That's all I have to say on your response.

[Bored chemist]

In order for the thinning to take place, people must not realize the danger. So Bored Chemist is helping God by telling others that cell phones are quite safe and that those who claim otherwise are nutters. Good job - keep going.

I'm quoting the evidence. The evidence says that phones don't do what you bear false witness about.
If that's supporting God in His endeavour to cull the world population, it's because He's lying.
Does a Perfect God need to tell lies to make a point?
That's not my idea of perfection.

If God wanted fewer people, he could simply make us less randy.
It would work, nobody would get upset about it.
But, instead, he chooses to  get us to kill eachother- whether it's via war (which actually kills people) or via phones (which... don't).

Do you understand why I'd not get up early on a Sunday to worship an  entity that did that?

You cannot use machines and devices to get repeatable observations of a communication from God.

You rather miss the vital point; you can't use anything else to do that either.

The smartest (those who realize the dangers)

I look forward to a plot of "some measure of smart" vs " belief that phones are causing significant harm".

My observations explain the Prime Cause, the apparent Intelligent Design, and the mysterious happenings involving psychic events.

No, they don't.

Try to find a contradiction in my theory.

You don't have a theory- look up the meaning of teh word.
However, I already pointed out problems with your idea.
You are choosing to ignore them.

That's OK as a personal choice, but you shouldn't do it on a science page.
If you were as bright as you think you are, you would already know that.
You keep doing it.
What does that say about you?

Most religions accept the concept of a soul,

Most of them tell you that the local equivalent of "a man in a frock should tell you what to do with your willy".
Reality isn't a democracy.

Unbreakable laws of physics cannot explain my experiences.

Maybe they can. but you wouldn't know that, because you don't understand the laws (and you refuse to learn).

[Bored chemist]

Trying to use my cell phone. Good should be God in two places. I see that the auto edit changed it here as well.

Anyone would think that God's not on your side.

[jeffreyH]

At some point in the far distant past the earth did not exist. That means that the bible, or for that matter any other religious text, did not exist.

For millions of years humans did not exist. Many other species did. Language as we know it took an awfully long time to develop. It preceded a written version of language by quite a long time.

So which religious text is the 'right' one? It would be  arrogant of Christians to think it is theirs. Or even hebrews.

The affairs of man started with many gods. Usually based upon constellations. The unknown in other words. Mankind has a huge imagination with tiny insight.

And here we are. Debating with our tiny insight.

[CliveG]

Clive - I disagree strongly. But I don't wish to discuss religion. I just wanted to respond to the question posed and put my two cents in. I never would have done so had I not had a strong grasp of world religions. I studied them throughout my lifetime. Especially in college and my won self study. Read the Bible twice cover to cover very carefully. Will repeat a few more times.

That's all I have to say on your response.

No problem. Thanks for your input.

It was only recently that I studied the various religions. Before that it was "practical field experience". I have been married to an atheist, a two Jewish women, a catholic, an agnostic and a Methodist. My son was a Scientologist and his wife is Muslim. My daughter is deeply Christian and the other son is Jewish but is also atheist.

My late wife was involved in reforming ex-combatants who had become the worst of criminals. She used Spirit and a combination of beliefs where the participants were asked to use a belief if a Higher Power. They sat solo in the bush for 24 hours and then took part in a ceremony in an African sweat lodge. I have danced in the hot sun from Friday noon to Sunday noon without food or water - and experienced a vision similar to that of Shamans. I have been to various services and taken part in various modalities.

My take on all of that was that there are indications of spirit and the supernatural. Both good and bad.

The bottom line is:
Is there a God? (I believe there is - 99%)
Is the existence of God contradictory to science? (I do not think so)
Can science prove the existence of God? (If one does an analysis of data to sort out noise similar to the analyzing of data from radio telescopes then science can pronounce that there is a decent possibility of a God).

Then one has to sort out the principles or rules associated with interacting with the Spirit world.

Example. My wife's work printer stopped functioning and was stuck on a nonsensical message. I was going to take it in for repair when our new neighbour happen to stop by and chat to my wife who was supervising the removal of tree cuttings outside. I mentioned the printer and he said to do a Google search. I was not getting the right information but persisted because I believe that the spirit world sends us helpful information by serendipitous means. I found the solution eventually. I would not have persisted if I did not believe I had been sent a message.

This has happened many times. This is how the believers have an evolutionary advantage.

[CliveG]

At some point in the far distant past the earth did not exist. That means that the bible, or for that matter any other religious text, did not exist.

For millions of years humans did not exist. Many other species did. Language as we know it took an awfully long time to develop. It preceded a written version of language by quite a long time.

So which religious text is the 'right' one? It would be  arrogant of Christians to think it is theirs. Or even hebrews.

The affairs of man started with many gods. Usually based upon constellations. The unknown in other words. Mankind has a huge imagination with tiny insight.

And here we are. Debating with our tiny insight.

The same can be said for man's search for the laws of physic and the writing of scientific texts. The laws have been refined and reworked. Science moved from religious beliefs to workable laws. As far as the religious texts, many have elements of truth, albeit with lots of stories which people of the time needed in order to practice the basics. The basics are always "Do Good" and "Appeal to God". Just as science involves the philosophical in some areas so does religion.

The texts do lay out some rules. One is that a living human cannot see God and have fireside chats. Those who claim to have done so are certainly fakes. There are "communications" with God that take place with ordinary people and those that have taken place with the prophets who had more direct insight, but are at a level of "Did that really happen." Even Jesus seemed to struggle to connect at times.

Our insight has grown enormously. We are capable of updating the religious texts where there is a need to do so. Recognize evolution for example as the path of the creation of humans, and recognize the Big Bang as the creation of the Universe.

[Bored chemist]

Can science prove the existence of God? (If one does an analysis of data to sort out noise similar to the analyzing of data from radio telescopes then science can pronounce that there is a decent possibility of a God).

So, the Word of God is only available to those with money and technology.
That's a pretty sh**y way for Him to behave, isn't it?

[CliveG]

Can science prove the existence of God? (If one does an analysis of data to sort out noise similar to the analyzing of data from radio telescopes then science can pronounce that there is a decent possibility of a God).

So, the Word of God is only available to those with money and technology.
That's a pretty sh**y way for Him to behave, isn't it?

Your illogical comments never cease to amaze me.

Ignorance is bliss. No fear of the afterlife, eh?

Your soul may regret your disrespect when it is surprised to find that 1) there is an afterlife and 2) you should have behaved better.

Take it from someone with experience. Although I experienced the nice section of the afterlife, I was aware that there were layers that went down to very unpleasant.

And my experience has also been that there are some lifetime consequences also.

Many of the poor and the dispossessed benefit most from the words of God. They follow the basics and have contentment despite their circumstances. My experience as well - in Africa.

[Bored chemist]

No fear of the afterlife, eh?

With thousands of sects to choose from, it's odds on that any given religion is the wrong one.
Why should I be any more scared than you?

Take it from someone with experience. Although I experienced the nice section of the afterlife, I

There are lots of words for people who make claims like that.
"Deluded" is probably the most polite.

Many of the poor and the dispossessed benefit most from the words of God.

Wouldn't it make more sense for God to simply ensure that they were not "the poor and the dispossessed".
Or is He, as I suggested, being a bit of a s**t?

Your illogical comments never cease to amaze me.

My posting was logical.
Which bit were you unable to understand?
Do you not understand that buying a radio telescope and data processing is expensive?

[hamdani yusuf]

Can science prove the existence of God? (If one does an analysis of data to sort out noise similar to the analyzing of data from radio telescopes then science can pronounce that there is a decent possibility of a God).

What kind of data can increase the possibility of gods? What kind of data can decrease the possibility of gods?
 

[CliveG]

Can science prove the existence of God? (If one does an analysis of data to sort out noise similar to the analyzing of data from radio telescopes then science can pronounce that there is a decent possibility of a God).

What kind of data can increase the possibility of gods? What kind of data can decrease the possibility of gods?

Good question.

It is the same as the checking whether cell towers cause health problems.

One lists and records the narratives from people. A lot of people and a lot of towers. And one does the same for people not close to cell towers.

Then one puts on filters to rate the veracity of each narrative. Are the answers consistent  with each other (one asks questions that should give similar answers but are differently phrased)? Eliminate those with inconsistencies. Check for known illnesses BUT check it the symptoms got worse. Check for speed of progression of illnesses since (IMO) the illness can be speeded up compared to non-tower cases.

Do a credibility test on each participant. Do they have a tendency to exaggerate? Do they have bad memories? Do they tend to guess an answer if they are unsure? One filters to get reliable data.

Do something similar with regular people. Give them questions with known wrong answers and see how they respond. Check for mystic experiences and see how many can be related to imagination or hallucination. Check for common threads, especially across different religions.

Example. I asked someone what evidence assured them that God existed. They thought carefully and then gave the example of a man who changed his career and dedicated his life to casting out demons in tribal villages in South Africa. He did so successfully. Some may not have been demons but may have been psychological and worked anyhow. I got a demon out a man - just by a heated interchange so I do not scoff.

When one has a filtered list then one needs to explain how such events can be "manufactured" by the brain. I do not believe that under normal everyday circumstances that a spontaneous hallucination occurs. What science is looking for is "glitches" in the fabric of reality.

The problem is having the study done properly and scientifically in a way that does not presuppose an outcome. Far too many scientific studies do this. It is easy to see the ones that are just done to get the grant money where students take supposedly random polls with so much irrelevant data.

One can do a scientific analysis of various aspects of the supernatural and check for inconsistencies and contradictions. One God or multiple Gods? One God with helper Gods/spirits? Good versus evil - is it evolution or damaged personalities or can people respond impulsively to a demonic suggestion? Reincarnation - logical when compared to billions of souls existing in a do-nothing state?

And so on.

[Bored chemist]

Do they tend to guess an answer if they are unsure?

LOL.

[evan_au]

On last week's podcast, Chris mentioned a sibling show, Naked Reflections.
Each week, it takes a science story from Naked Scientists, and has a look at the implications for society.
They try to look at the topic from a variety of viewpoints (including religious viewpoints).
If anything, it might help us see things from another person's viewpoint.
See: https://www.thenakedscientists.com/podcasts/naked-reflections

[CliveG]

Do they tend to guess an answer if they are unsure?

LOL.

Clearly you have not experienced different cultures. Until fairly recently, tribal mores in South Africa dictated that one could not say "No" to a superior. Asked if he could drive a bulldozer a man replied "Yes" - you can imagine the damage he caused before the supervisor found out the man had not a clue and never even sat in one.

Which is why I stress "intelligent design" of the filters.

BTW - In my opinion, you would never get past the first pass of screening out  those who shoot from the lip before engaging the brain. Not being nasty - just my assessment to give you an example you might relate to.

[CliveG]

On last week's podcast, Chris mentioned a sibling show, Naked Reflections.
Each week, it takes a science story from Naked Scientists, and has a look at the implications for society.
They try to look at the topic from a variety of viewpoints (including religious viewpoints).
If anything, it might help us see things from another person's viewpoint.
See: https://www.thenakedscientists.com/podcasts/naked-reflections

Thanks. First glance is encouraging.

One topic which I will look at was "A good death". I just bought a book with title like that. Have not had a chance to read it yet, but I may need to soon regarding myself. I asked the Tarot cards about my health in the next few months because I am struggling. The first card - the key card - was the Death card. The literature says "Never tell a client that it means death - tell them it means renewal". Well, yes, mostly. But I know how to interpret the cards. Certainly it was a warning which I am heeding, because other cards were more positive and it was not the final outcome card. I have made some serious allowances and adjustments to simplify my life and focus on home and personal health, as well as ensure that an unexpected end for me does not leave too big a disruption. It has helped.