You can't prove a negative. Unless the world is a vast simulation and Schrodinger's Cat is taken to the extreme... atoms did not suddenly exist when we observed them. Electricity did not pop into existence when we observed it. X-rays did not pop into existence only because we had a machine.
Scientists who disbelieve something simply because it has not been measured are closing the door to wonder.
It is true that something they cannot measure may not exist, yet as the examples I provided... sometimes they do. Yet sometimes they don't.
As to your take on God. It is so nebulous and ultimately incomprehensible to us that it literally could be MANY things and we'd have trouble proving/or disproving.
- One popular possibility in mainstream is that this is all a simulation of some kind much like one we'd make in a computer, but far more complex.
- Then you have the vast variety of religions in history. Why is one without proof accepted, and the others laughed at and called fools?
"Scientists who disbelieve something simply because it has not been measured are closing the door to wonder."
They are also purposefully closing the door to falsehoods and thereby protecting the integrity of their held beliefs. What is more valuable to you, wonder or truth? Should we believe in leprechauns or anything else someone could easily fabricate just because we can't prove a negative? That doesn't seem like a very practical way to function.
Believing everything imaginable exists is not the null hypothesis.
I don't believe everything imaginable exists. I also don't believe we've measured everything, or likely ever will.
Pretty simple use the scientific method. It doesn't say anything about something not existing because it has not been measured. It really only deals with things we can measure.
So closing mind isn't scientific either. Might as well be a religion. ;)
You don't have to close your mind to not believe something for which there is no evidence. If you value holding true beliefs, believing in something without reason would be foolish.
You keep saying "there is no evidence". That is false.
There is ton's of evidence. There is no absolute "proof".
But court cases are decided all the time without "proof".
The archeological records that exist exceed all other sources of historical information in quality and quantity.
So, we have evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that real, credible eyewitnesses observed Jesus do and say amazing things.
Now you, the jury, need to decide whether they are credible or not.
No @stan there is not a ton of evidence. There is a massive lack of evidence.
Nesting limit reached
I didn't say I believed it. I said science could not prove or disprove it. I am an atheist / deist.He likely did not see your latest response since you replied to me, and not @stan.
You'd be surprised at how observant he is.