Has science found God?

[1213]

As Bible suggests, this world is like a computer simulation. And now some have found evidence this could be true, world may be like a computer simulation. What say you, have science found God, the programmer of the universe?

"Simulation theory is a theoretical hypothesis that says what people perceive as reality is actually an advanced, hyper-realistic computer simulation, possibly overseen by a higher being".
https://builtin.com/hardware/simulation-theory

"Do you ever experience something and think to yourself, “This can’t be real.” To some people who have bought into the notion that our reality is currently being simulated, there are examples all around us, that demonstrate glitches in the Matrix. Deja Vu? Ghosts? The Mandela Effect? These could all be direct examples of flaws in the simulation."
https://interestingengineering.com/scie ... ion-theory

"MIT Theoretical physicist James Gates has made a discovery that allegedly caused Neil deGrasse Tyson to sit down in shock. Now for the uninitiated, superstring theory is a concept that could unify all aspects of physics if proven right. While working on his superstring theory, he made an odd discovery. Gates claims to have identified what appears to be actual computer code embedded in the equations of string theory that describe the fundamental particles of our universe. In short, he found “error-correcting codes,” the same error-correcting codes that you might find on the web browser you are using right now."
https://interestingengineering.com/scie ... ion-theory

[The Barbarian]

Science can't find God.

But scientists can.

Science cannot confirm that the gods are human inventions.

But scientists can.

Richard Dawkins seems unwilling to take that step. One can accept God on faith, or one can reject God on faith.

Which, I suppose, is why Dawkins will not reject the possibility of God.

[The Barbarian]

"MIT Theoretical physicist James Gates has made a discovery that allegedly caused Neil deGrasse Tyson to sit down in shock. Now for the uninitiated, superstring theory is a concept that could unify all aspects of physics if proven right. While working on his superstring theory, he made an odd discovery. Gates claims to have identified what appears to be actual computer code embedded in the equations of string theory that describe the fundamental particles of our universe. In short, he found “error-correcting codes,” the same error-correcting codes that you might find on the web browser you are using right now."
https://interestingengineering.com/scie ... ion-theory

BTW, there are error-correcting codes in DNA as well. And the evidence indicates that they came about by natural processes. Which may indicate a particularly competent Creator, but certainly does not rule out other explanations.

[Tcg]

Accepts God on faith?

Only way to do it. Science, by definition, can't. Even Richard Dawkins admit that God might exist, although he thinks that if God does exist, he's not a very nice guy.

That doesn't even match your claim under consideration, or the verse you provided and certainly isn't evidence to support your claim.

I have no idea what Lewis (who was not a scientist) "apparently" did has to do with any of this.

Lewis wrote that he became a Christian based on evidence and reasoning. The one thing that did resonate with me was that His disciples were willing to undergo torture and horrible deaths rather than deny that after His death, he returned to them and conversed and ate with them. If they were lying, they took it to an incredible extreme.

Your claim was that scientists can find God. How does the mention of Dawkins or Lewis or the disciples support your claim?


Tcg

[The Barbarian]

Accepts God on faith?

Only way to do it. Science, by definition, can't. Even Richard Dawkins admit that God might exist, although he thinks that if God does exist, he's not a very nice guy.

Lewis wrote that he became a Christian based on evidence and reasoning. The one thing that did resonate with me was that His disciples were willing to undergo torture and horrible deaths rather than deny that after His death, he returned to them and conversed and ate with them. If they were lying, they took it to an incredible extreme.

Your claim was that scientists can find God. How does the mention of Dawkins or Lewis or the disciples support your claim?
Tcg

Properly speaking, anyone can find God. Dawkins merely points out that science can deny God. I mentioned C.S. Lewis, who disagrees with me, asserting that he came to God by reason.

[Tcg]

Accepts God on faith?

Only way to do it. Science, by definition, can't. Even Richard Dawkins admit that God might exist, although he thinks that if God does exist, he's not a very nice guy.

Lewis wrote that he became a Christian based on evidence and reasoning. The one thing that did resonate with me was that His disciples were willing to undergo torture and horrible deaths rather than deny that after His death, he returned to them and conversed and ate with them. If they were lying, they took it to an incredible extreme.

Your claim was that scientists can find God. How does the mention of Dawkins or Lewis or the disciples support your claim?
Tcg

Properly speaking, anyone can find God. Dawkins merely points out that science can deny God. I mentioned C.S. Lewis, who disagrees with me, asserting that he came to God by reason.

I see. Dawkins and Lewis are irrelevant then and you've changed your claim to "anyone can find God." Please provide evidence sufficient to support this claim.


Tcg

[The Barbarian]

Properly speaking, anyone can find God. Dawkins merely points out that science can deny God. I mentioned C.S. Lewis, who disagrees with me, asserting that he came to God by reason.

I see. Dawkins and Lewis are irrelevant then and you've changed your claim to "anyone can find God."

Well,that was the point. Scientists aren't confined to science.

All joking aside, the point is that truth is a stronger thing than evidence.

[Clownboat]

Richard Dawkins seems unwilling to take that step.

Every human understands that the gods are human inventions. Some humans place faith in one of the available gods/religions in order to justify their special pleading.

To illustrate further. If we inquired with the human population on earth, we would come away with claims that 100% of god concepts are human inventions. There is not a single god concept that would not be said to be invented by humans. I don't offer this as proof of anything by the way, just to justify my claim that every human understands that the gods are in fact human inventions (less one for the religious).

One can accept God on faith, or one can reject God on faith.

No faith is required in order to not find things to be credible (like Thor for you). Faith is needed to find the non-credible to be credible though, which is why I argue that faith should be avoided at all costs in life.
Santa not being real is something I find credible.
Jehovah is the same. No faith is required for these claims to be credible and a person can still be open to being wrong about Santa or Jehovah.

Which, I suppose, is why Dawkins will not reject the possibility of God.

When an answer is unknown, like how did the universe or life on earth begin, it would be foolish to reject possible explanations. "The gods are human inventions, but I'm open to being wrong about one of them or one yet to be proposed." I would imagine that you would get a reply something like that from Dawkins, because there is no justified reason to reject the possibility of there being gods out there. Dawkins would understand this.

[William]

[Replying to 1213 in post #1]

As Bible suggests, this world is like a computer simulation.

The bible suggests that the universe, like a computer simulation is a created thing.

And now some have found evidence this could be true, world may be like a computer simulation. What say you, have science found God, the programmer of the universe?

The programmer is still hidden in the sense that scientist using science can find out stuff about things it can examine.

"Simulation theory is a theoretical hypothesis that says what people perceive as reality is actually an advanced, hyper-realistic computer simulation, possibly overseen by a higher being".

This theory could be explained in a number of ways.
For example, we may be extraterrestrials on a deep space voyage who pass time in a holodeck and what we are experiencing is something we created. Does that make us "God"? If so, then we are stepping toward finding ourselves.

"Do you ever experience something and think to yourself, “This can’t be real.”

Anything I experience I consider to be real, even if I also think it is a real simulation.

To some people who have bought into the notion that our reality is currently being simulated, there are examples all around us, that demonstrate glitches in the Matrix. Deja Vu? Ghosts? The Mandela Effect? These could all be direct examples of flaws in the simulation.

Why consider these as "flaws"? They may be purposeful indicators.

MIT Theoretical physicist James Gates has made a discovery that allegedly caused Neil deGrasse Tyson to sit down in shock. Now for the uninitiated, superstring theory is a concept that could unify all aspects of physics if proven right. While working on his superstring theory, he made an odd discovery. Gates claims to have identified what appears to be actual computer code embedded in the equations of string theory that describe the fundamental particles of our universe. In short, he found “error-correcting codes,” the same error-correcting codes that you might find on the web browser you are using right now.

Finding “error-correcting codes,” isn't the same thing as finding GOD.

The answer to the question "Has science found God?" appears to be "no".

[The Barbarian]

[Replying to 1213 in post #1]

The answer to the question "Has science found God?" appears to be "no".

Of course it hasn't. It can't.

[William]

[Replying to 1213 in post #1]

The answer to the question "Has science found God?" appears to be "no".

Of course it hasn't. It can't.

Why not?