re: #157 b_sharp

So what? I don’t need to have 100% proof of that, all I need is for the evidence to be convincing.

What convincing evidence against God’s existence do you have? That is all I ma asking. I am not asking for 100% evidence or even 5% evidence. What evidence at all, that is physical, measurable and scientific do you have against His existence do you have?

How small does the place a god, or God, could possibly hide have to be, before we accept that he/she/it doesn’t exist? That God hiding place keeps getting smaller and smaller.

Respectfully, you are making sloppy work of Feynman’s argument.

When Feynman made that argument he was more careful in what he said. If you mean that more and more of the physical world is explained by science as we go on, then yes of course. However, in his arguments he was referring to ancient pagans as examples - even though he falsely extended it to monotheists. If you are a pagan and you worship natural phenomena, then yes indeed, science is going to come and clean your clock, because natural phenomena are subject to scientific investigation.

But that does not apply to God as conceived by monotheism.

Why does the idea of a god/God have a different standard of disproof than everything else? The existence of Thor doesn’t need to be 100% disproved for it to be rejected. Yahweh is no different.

Thor is a god of thunder. Thunder is a natural phenomena caused by the interactions of electromagnetism and fluid dynamics. God is conceived as the creator of those physical principles. Hence there is no contradiction in the case of God.