Wrong we are not a perfect distance.

We have shifted orbit.

Also God != fine tuning

I can refute it, since we evolved.

We also had a human bottleneck.

If we were to have a debate about UFO's in the past. you would literally say its not true or proven when just recently the governemnt and scientific community proves its real.

So technically, we were nearly extinct at one point.

Wrong.

I don't think denying God exist is even bad

Why do you deny God?

Because I am a naturalist, I deny the existence of a metaphysical being. I think the abundance of philosophical arguments and evidence from science has refuted the existence of such a God in the theistic sense.

The latter for a theistic one and the former for any type of metaphysical being.

The people who advanced science did it with purpose, they didnt simply use it against their own ability to realise that there even was an higher entity that had to of created everything.

You are a half truer

Wrong.

Majority of philosophers and scientists are atheists.

By the way.

Appeal to authority anyways.

You do understand the universe works via a form of laws of nature.

Yes.

Those laws didnt magically exist without there being a "God" to place them there

Wrong.

They were simply constants of the universe..

If you destroy all the worlds in the universe. You think that life will still exist?

“There’s a famous example that theists like to give – or even cosmologists who haven’t thought about it enough – that the expansion rate of the early universe is tuned to within one part in ten to the 60th. That’s the naïve estimate, back of the envelope, pencil and paper you would do. But in this case, you can do better. You can go into the equations of general relativity, and there is a correct, rigorous derivation of the probability. And when you ask the same question using the correct equations, you find that the probability is one. All but a set of measure zero of early universe cosmologies have the right expansion rate to live for a long time and allow life to exist.” - Sean Carroll

Debunked again.

Sean Carroll is a physicist and a cosmologist by the way.

He has a phd.

You are debunking Gods existence through an individual that has never reasoned with nor questioned how it wouldnt exist.

Wrong.

You can literally do math and prove God exists

I am simply projecting his refutation to the misinterpretation of fine tuning.

Wrong.

Please show an argument which use mathematics to prove God exists. Because I just used one to show God doesn't exist.

Throttle you are autistic god does exist you stupid fucking idiot

@PapaPog Meet your burden of proof.

<:yus:538083968881524747>

The universe didnt allways exist? What started it is what i am trying to answer to you but you are refuting.

The Bible dumbass

@PapaPog Wrong.

Circular reasoning.

The universe didn’t create its self

@!GoldenKingship! Nah I said how the universe was created.

@PapaPog Why can it not?

What’s your reason on why he’s not and I want a sentence not a paragraph

@PapaPog No, because you are too stupid to be in this channel.

Listen we all know that science cannot prove that god exists because he is outside the realm!

It would need a trigger and if stuff was the same why would it magically change

@!GoldenKingship! I've been telling you this.

For the past hour.

But we are now debating metaphysics.

@PapaPog virtual particles

They are without cause.

Science can not disprove the existence for the same reason dumbass so get debunked

Throttle you just admitted he is outside the realm

So why are you using science fool

So he cannot exist if he is outside a physical realm.

No I'm using philosophy

And metaphysics.

Not science.

So he does exist

No. He does not.

But a minute ago you said he was outside the realm and real just not in this one

Prove he doesnt exist withouit science i gaurantee it will be hard for you.

Wrong.

You are using a strawman fallacy.

Wrong.

@!GoldenKingship! I just did.

1) Being ontologically prior to a set with the highest cardinality is a great-making property.
2) There does not exist a set with the highest cardinality.
3) Therefore, one cannot be ontologically prior to the set with the greatest cardinality.
4) Therefore, a being cannot be maximally great.

You didn’t

He is real. Weare inside GOD

This does not use science.

This is philosophy and maths.

The universe is dark because we are in his own image

Wrong.

The universe is not dark.

Wrong

We are inside him and you can't escape dumbo.

It is simply an empty vaccume.

Again wrong.

We are the consciousness within

So you then concede?

Was was shall be

You have failed to defend your God and your faith.

Wrong

GG @PapaPog, you just advanced to level 1!

He is right

I debunked you using philosophical and religous proofs.

In this argument I've clearly refuted youm

Nope.

Wrong

@TheNobody Can I ban these two now?

I've exposed them to be trolls.

for what

Wrong

For shitposting and trolling in a serious debate channel.

You can scroll up.

You spammed wrong at me I shall do back

Gonna ban me because i have different views than you. How ironic

Well no, it's just that your views are false.

I take philosphy class and took religion class during my shool studies. Have you?