Can You Disprove The Existance of God Then?

A Nobel Prize winning physicist wrote a popular book about the Higgs a few years ago and he chose a sensible title for the book. Unfortunately, the publisher made him change the title to “The God Particle”. Perhaps that’s why a lot of religious types have glommed onto it…

1 Like

@TheRealPhonecianKing, either debate sensibly or your account will be suspended.


Question? Higgs Boson(God Particle), Is Not “Dark Matter Right”? Higgs Boson being Spiritual Realm atmosphere.

And Here Goes Objective Evidence of Amborginisis.

Evolution defy The Laws Of Genetics Itself by Gene Regulation?

Do Not Believe In Evolution.

1 Like

Oh look, it’s yet another exercise in “Let’s post ex recto apologetic fabrications” by a magic man fetishist, and in this case, additionally displaying clear signs of functional illiteracy.

Let’s take a look at this shall we?

This is poppycock plain and simple.

First of all, the existence of any sort of god type entity is an unanswered question. We know this for one simple reason - namely, that if a proper, rigorous answer had ever been found for this question in the past, said answer would now be part of our mainstream body of knowledge, and no one would seriously argue against that answer.

That such an answer has never been found, on its own tells us that your above assertion is horseshit.

Worse still for mythology fanboys of various species, cartoon magic men from pre-scientific mythologies can all be discarded safely, on the grounds that they are all asserted to possess contradictory and absurd properties. Magic man fetishists tend to be ignorant of elementary concepts such as this, along with vast swathes of facts that also flush pre-scientific mythological assertions down the toilet.

Of course, once again, a magic man fetishist has come crashing onto the forums with a pile of gibberish, without bothering to exert the basic level of diligence required to determine if posts of this sort have been presented before, let alone whether said posts have actually been addressed by the regulars. But I’m used to seeing this brand of intellectual indolence from your ilk.

Moving on …

Oh, you just had to resurrect this repeatedly demolished canard and duplicitous strawman caricature of scientific postulates, didn’t you?

Strap yourself in, Looby Loo, you’re in for a hard ride.

Let’s bury the “atheists believe something came from nothing” garbage you’re peddling here once and for all, shall we?

Item one. Atheists dispense with belief altogether. Instead, if they’re contemplating a postulate properly, they ask “what evidence exists in support of this postulate?”, and look to whichever discipline is supplying the evidence.

Item two. The people who REALLY think the universe came from “nothing”, are those supernaturalists who think their imaginary magic man from their favourite mythology, waved his magic todger and poofed the universe into existence from nothing. So even before I move on to the next items, this alone stuffs the “atheists think the universe came from nothing” excrement down the toilet and pulls the flush hard.

Item three. The question of the origin of the universe has nothing to do with atheism. This question is the remit of cosmological physics. And, once again, those of us who paid attention in class, turn to that discipline, and ask what postulates arise therefrom, and what evidence is supplied in support thereof.

Item four. No cosmological physicist presents the fatuous notion that the universe “came from nothing”. Instead, cosmological physicists postulate that testable natural processes, involving well-defined entities and interactions, were responsible for the origin of the observable universe in its current form.

Item five. The question of the origin of the universe is an active research topic, and as a corollary, a number of hypotheses are extant in the field, with respect to the origin of the observable universe. Indeed, it’s a measure of how far cosmological physics has progressed, that researchers in the field are able to postulate a number of pre-Big-Bang cosmologies, and then work out how to test those cosmologies and the hypotheses underpinning them.

Item six. As an example of the ideas extant in the literature, I’m aware of two papers by Steinhardt & Turok, two leading cosmological physicists, in which they propose a pre-Big-Bang cosmology centred upon braneworld collisions, and which possesses three elegant features. Namely:

[1] It provides a mechanism for the donation of energy to the newly instantiated universe, facilitating subsequent matter synthesis;

[2] It eliminates the singularity problem from standard Big Bang cosmology;

[3] It provides a testable prediction, namely that the power spectrum of primordial gravitational waves will take a specific form, with the graph skewed towards short wavelengths.

Indeed, [3] above is one of the reasons scientists have been labouring diligently, to produce operational gravitational wave detectors, precisely so that they can test this prediction, once they’ve learned how to distinguish between primordial gravitational waves and gravitational waves of more recent origin. The moment they learn to do this, the requisite tests will be conducted. Furthermore, if those tests reveal a power spectrum that matches the Steinhardt-Turok prediction, then Steinhardt & Turok walk away with the Nobel Prize for Physics.

Try learning some FACTS before posting next time.

Did you have a sub-arachnoid haemorrhage when you typed this?

Word salad. An Eliza level bot could produce a more coherent sentence. You know less about logic than my tropical fish know about spinor calculus.

Again, complete and utter poppycock.

Modern scientific discoveries have utterly destroyed the fatuous and absurd assertions that litter your sad little Bronze Age mythology. Perhaps the most hilarious example being the cretinous assertion from your goat herder mythology, that genetics is purportedly controlled by coloured sticks.

This assertion was found to be a risible lie by a 19th century monk, whose landmark scientific research not only taught us how genetics actually operates, but laid the foundations of modern genetics as a properly constituted scientific discipline.

Apparently your cartoon magic man, if it ever existed, was not only too stupid to present basic biological facts correctly to its favourite tribe of Bronze Age nomads, but was also insufficiently “omniscient” to foresee the emergence of said 19th century monk and his diligent scientific experiments.

Likewise, the infantile cartoon cosmogony peddled in Genesis 1 is a crock of shit from start to finish, and its assertions are known to be feculent drivel by anyone who paid attention in a properly constituted science class. For example, the assertion that Planet Earth was “created” before its parent star is ridiculous in the light of data obtained by modern astrophysicists, who have numerous space telescope images of planetary accretion taking place after the formation of the parent star. Likewise, the assertion that plants were “created” before the Sun existed to power photosynthesis is infantile nonsense. I could continue this dissection, but your literacy level suggests that it would be wasted upon you.

Ahem, the Copernican heliocentric model of the Solar System isn’t a matter of “belief”, it’s a matter of demonstrable fact, backed by appropriate physics.

You’re expecting to be treated seriously when you can’t even name relevant terms correctly?

This gibberish is supposed to be saying what, precisely?

More semi-literate word salad.

And, so many canards in one incoherent sentence.

First of all, it’s obvious that you don’t know what atheism actually IS. Sit still for the requisite schooling.

Atheism, in its rigorous formulation, is nothing more than suspicion of unsupported mtyhology fanboy assertions. That is IT. Equivalently, it consists of “YOU assert that your cartoon magic man exists, YOU support your assertions”, preferably with something better than “My favourite Bronze Age mythology says so”, or ex recto apologetic fabrications that an astute child would point and laugh at, fabrications that are littered with logical fallacies and blatant, duplicitous strawman caricatures of scientific postulates.

Second, the mere fact that modern scientific discoveries have destroyed utterly the farcical assertions of pre-scientific mythologies, alone gives us confidence that said mythologies are worthless as a source of purported “information” on this topic.

No you don’t, you just want to proselytise for your infantile attachment to a cartoon magic man from a Bronze Age mythology. We’ve seen this behaviour from your ilk so often, we can smell it coming before it arrives.

But, you’re going to be given the requisite schooling anway, whether you like it or not, but first, a necessary preamble.

Before providing numerous cogent reasons why those of us who paid attention in class dismiss pre-scientific mythologies and their merely asserted magic entities, I’ll attend to the obvious deficits of elementary knowledge that tend to be a feature of mythology fanboy utterings on this matter. I shall therefore explain how proper discourse actually works in properly constituted rigorous fields of human endeavour.

First of all, whoever presents an assertion, is required to support that assertion with a proper standard of evidence. Those of us who are suspicious of said assertion don’t have to support the contrary assertion, we simply have to sit back and watch you fail to support YOUR assertion, which not only becomes safely discardable as a result of your failure, but remains irrelevant from the standpoint of acquiring substantive knowledge.

As a corollary of my above exposition on the actual nature of atheism, dismissal of unsupported mythology fanboy assertions isn’t “faith”, it’s the very antithesis thereof. Because mythology fanboys have provided us with a wealth of observational data, to the effect that “faith” consists of nothing more than uncritical acceptance of unsupported assertions. NOT accepting those assertions uncritically is therefore the antithesis of “faith” by definition.

In addition, assertions possess, when presented, the status “truth value unknown”, and until those assertions are tested in order to remedy this epistemological deficit, those assertions are again safely discardable, because they provide no useful or substantive knowledge while in that state of limbo. Only when assertions are tested via proper, rigorous tests, to determine their truth value, does this status change. The assertions found to be false, are discarded except for pedagogical purposes, and the assertions found to be true, are the ones that become the evidentially supported postulates underpinning our knowledge base.

This, indeed, is how every proper, rigorously constructed human endeavour operates, from pure mathematics to empirical science. Unfortunately, some seek to exempt their favourite mythologies, and the assertions contained therein, from this elementary but reliable framework. This isn’t going to happen among those of us who paid attention in class.

Now, as for those cogent reasons to dismiss fantasy magic entities, including your favourite one …

[1] If your magic entity is asserted to possess contradictory or absurd properties, it can be dismissed on those grounds alone, as I mentioned above. Which means that your favourite magic entity, along with several others, are tossed into the bin before I move on.

[2] Mythology fanboys of various species, have had over 5,000 years to provide genuine evidence for their various asserted fantastic magic entities, and in all that time, have provided nothing better than “my mythology says so”. Discardable on the grounds that the mythologies in question contain nothing but unsupported blind assertions on the subject.

[3] Mythology fanboys are incapable of agreeing among themselves on a global scale, which of the numerous mythologies humans have invented is purportedly the “right” mythology, and, adherents of a particular mythology are incapable of agreeing among themselves what said mythology is purportedly telling us. Apparently your cartoon magic man, if it actually exists, is happy with this hilarious and absurd morass of anti-consilience on the part of its worshippers.

[4] Mythologies contain assertions about the natural world, that have been utterly destroyed by scientific discoveries, and which no genuinely existing god type entity would allow itself to be associated with. I’ve already covered one hilarious example in detail above.

[5] Several million peer reviewed scientific papers document in exquisite detail, the evidence that testable natural processes are sufficient to explain the vast body of observational data obtained over the past centuries, and as a corollary, said findings have rendered cartoon magic men from goat herder mythologies superfluous to requirements and irrelevant.

[6] Indeed, expanding upon [5] above, scientists have alighted upon vast classes of entities and interactions, that the authors of pre-scientifc mythologies were incapable of even fantasising about, despite purportedly having the alleged “creator” of the universe present to tell them about said classes of entities and interactions. Furthermore,said scientists have placed said classes of entities and interactions into usefully predictive quantitative frameworks of knowledge, of a sort that the authors of mythologies would have regarded as magic.

Indeed, the authors of your sad little mythology knew nothing of the existence of five major continental land masses on this planet, and if you reside upon one of those land masses, this should be a source of much embarrassment to you.

[7] If the authors of any of the mythologies in question had indeed alighted upon the keys to the cosmos, and as a corollary, that the work of Nobel level scientists was supposedly all “wrong”, why does that supposedly “wrong” work of said Nobel level scientists work, and mythological assertions don’t?

[8] If any of the mythologies humans have invented, were something other than fanciful fiction treated farcically as fact, and there was some substance lurking within the obscurantist prose, why do mythology fanboys have to lie repeatedly in order to propagandise for their favourite mythologies? Mythology fanboys gatecrash various sites repeatedly, to post well-known and previously destroyed lies about atheism, atheists and various scientific topics, and in the latter case, demonstrate that they frequently lack sufficient functioning neurons to understand the scientific topics they claim to be able to dismiss.

So, that’s no less than EIGHT cogent reasons for dismissing your cartoon magic man (and all the others as well).

What was that you were saying about us not providing evidence for our dismissal of your imaginary cartoon magic entities?

Now let’s move on to the rest of this garbage you’ve served up, shall we?

Good luck with that, given the above ruthless destruction of your complacent and unsupported assertions.

Wow, that’s a galactic piece of hubris on your part. Not least because [b]numerous tenured academic theologicans themselves openly admit that they don’t have “all the answers” in this vein. Of course, various charlatans peddling assorted amateur apologetics, of a sort that actual theologians consider worse than worthless, step up to the plate with woefully arrogant assertions such as this, but none of them ever possess the self-awareness to realise that this is exactly how those who spent time acquiring substantive knowledge view them.

So, let’s see what feculent rectal semolina you’re offering, shall we?

Your idea of “proving” the existence of your cartoon magic man, consists of regurgitating a mythological assertion about two Bronze Age agrarians?


You don’t even rise to the level of competence required to be worthy of a point of view.

Funny how all the truly lame-brained intellectual indolents resort to “Bro”.

Oh, and both palaeontology and molecular phylogeny have much to say about human origins, that destroys your mythology’s dribblingly encephalitic assertions on the subject. Indeed, if your sad little Bronze Age mythology was something other than a tedious collection of bad fairy tales, the entire scientific discipline of molecular phylogeny would not even exist.

It’s truly a testament to the utterly palsied, cretinous level of cognitive operation on the part of magic man fetishists, that they routinely gatecrash this site and post drivel of this steamingly feculent level. The bum custard you’ve just served up would be considered gibberish by 11 year olds where I live

Meanwhile, I’m willing to bet that you don’t even know the role that the Higgs Boson you were hilariously unable to name properly, plays within the Standard Model of Particle Physics, let alone the substantive underlying reason why it (and other bosons) play the role that they do. But I’m also willing to bet that you never even encountered the word “tensor” in your entire life before I included said word in this post.

Indeed, your outing has just provided me with a ninth cogent reason to dismiss your cartoon magic man. Namely, how come your cartoon magic man, if it ever existed, sends the most slug-brained, sub-amoeboid specimens to propagate its purported “message”, while science can call upon the most brilliant minds to present a consistent, coherent and consilient world view backed by a supertanker load of data and empirical tests, a world view that destroys utterly pathetic and infantile mythological assertions?

I don’t expect someone with your parlous level of literacy to be even capable of understanding the many points I’ve presented above, let alone providing a genuine, substantive answer thereto, but then that’s another important lesson your ilk has to learn the hard way when they come here - I don’t post here for their benefit, because most of your ilk are incapable of learning even elementary concepts, let alone ideas that require a certain level of education. Your outing here has demonstrated this in a fashion that constitutes a breathtaking example of barrel scraping. I’ll go so far as to offer the opinion, based upon the observational data you’ve kindly provided, that you have yet to graduate beyond potty training.



Piece of The Atom. Higgs Boson.

Since You want To know I believe In Yahweh/BAAL Mono polytheism Cananite Religion philosophy. Property of The Temple. Opposites Information, Experience.

Bachalor Theologian Told Me Angels are Invisible. Connects with My Higgs Boson Theory.

1 Like

TROLL ! One inane BS assertion after another.


His gibberish has been put in a paper bag, handed to him, and he has been escorted out of the hall.


Oh look, the tsunami of tard continues.

Blind unsupported assertion. And safely discardable on that basis without further ado.

Did you have a school to attend as a child?

We can measure its effects with exquisite precision. Indeed, no less a person than Newton, provided an equation describing the behaviour of gravity, that is still a sufficiently good approximation, to allow NASA to plan gravity assist spaceflight trajectories and position spacecraft where they want them. Such as the Cassini-Huygens mission, which spent seven years in space, following a gravity-assist trajectory covering seven billion miles, utilising the gravitational pull of Venus, Earth and Jupiter, to position the spacecraft in orbit around Titan, to within about 100 metres of where the scientists intended, and within about 2 minutes of the intended arrival time.

The mythology you masturbate over has nothing comparable to offer.

Observed events aren’t a matter of “belief”. Purely by accident, you appear to have alighted upon one actual correct concept, more by luck than actual reasoning, which is strikingly absent from your witterings.

More incoherent gibberish.

What you cook up in the broken television in your head, has NO connection to reality.

More illiterate gibberish.

You don’t have a “theory” in the accepted scientific sense of the word, all you have is a pile of suppuratingly gangrenous, incoherently rambling and illiterate cortical wet dreams.

You have yet to establish properly that your cartoon magic man even exists. The cretinous tinselly apologetic holograms you cook up as an ersatsz for genuine postulates and deduction, fail to meet even the most elementary criteria required to constitute “evidence” for this assertion.

More verminous, pestilential and unhinged stream of consciousness wet dreaming.

You’ve failed to demonstrate even this assertion.

Crap. Another infantile unsupported blind assertion that can be safely tossed into the bin.

Poppycock. Your excremental drivel is as far removed from genuine logic, as the products of my rectal passage are from diamonds.

You manifestly wouldn’t recognise genuine logic if it backed an M1 Abrams main battle tank into your ribcage.

Blah blah blah … got something other than schizoid ramblings to present?

I can tell you never attended a properly constructed physics class at any time in your life.

Why do enthusiasts for rectally extracted woo always post inane witterings about “energy”?

Once again, try learning some actual physics.

No it hasn’t. Another elementary mistake. Apparently you failed to learn that the earth is only 4.6 billion years old. The universe as a whole is 13.6 billion years old.

But of course, you never bothered at any time in your life to learn facts, did you?

Who gives a flying fuck what your worthless goat herder mythology merely asserts?

Oh look, more stream of consciousness wet dreaming.

Forget to take your medication, did you?

Utter wank.

I wasn’t aware that psychiatric hospitals let patients access the Internet …

This is hilarious gibberish.

If you think the existence of humans 2,000 years before your favourite goat herder mythology even existed, provides support for the ridiculous assertions thereof, then you need to re-take all your basic classes from scratch.

What hallucinogens were you smoking when you made this up?

This unhinged, rambling cortical diarrhoea bears all the hallmarks of being the product of untreated schizophrenia.

It’s stream of consciousness wet dream time again … did you have a school to attend as a child?

Yawn. Lay off the mushrooms.

Bullshit. Don’t even try to peddle creationist wankery here, because I’ve spent nearly 15 years reading and reviewing actual peer reviewed scientific papers from the evolutionary biology literature, and I know you’re talking out of your arse.

Evolution isn’t a matter of “belief”, dolt, it’s a matter of evidence and understanding. Indeed, I’m aware of direct experimental tests of evolution that can be conducted in a high school laboratory, and I’ve presented examples thereof here in the past. As you would have known if you had exercised an atom of diligence before unleashing your feculent drivel.

Even ChatGPT could produce something more coherent than this.

Crap. You wouldn’t know what a “bachelor theologian” is if one walked up to you and kicked you in the nuts.

If you are, as I suspect, some sort of troll posting this gibberish for the shits and giggles, then you’ve failed, because all you’ve done is mimic known instances of cretinous levels of illiteracy among previous actual mythology fanboys. Indeed, the diligent here are aware of several such examples.

If on the other hand, this output of yours is indicative of your actual state of mind, you need professional help.


Yes, you can tell from the name. All known “fundamental” particles fall into to two categories. Fermions and bosons. Fermions are matter, bosons are not. So just from the name you can tell.
Never mind, clearly you are not serious.


Is it just me, or did he sound like Elmer Fudd using a keyboard?

1 Like

Yo, everybody! Chill. I’ve got this. A couple of days late to this party because it just now popped up in my feed. Y’all can relax now, though. I’m somewhat fluent in the language RPK is speaking. I’ll attempt to determine what he is seeking. Wish me luck…

@TheRealPhonecianKing Greetings, waRy Traveler. For is it Not a brief AttemPt at passing JudgeMental on Others of lesser thoughts Within? AFter all, Should the Bonsai tRee particle deFlecting beyond the Fuenquency Zone collide with the Consciousness of wet Dreams, it would be only unnaturally heliocentric out of line with THE course of REASON. Therefore, with a Measuring of flatulent Pleading, the inquiring of the Masses within a Confined vacuum Remains in PonderAnce of your largely Unfocused INtentions. Illuminating US as TO what you Seek would bode Well for the FutuRe of gainful Discourse.


I love @CyberLN - suspended for “spewing gibberish” :smirk:


Reading @TheRealPhonecianKing posts was like reading Finnegans Wake.


What? Again?!?.. Well, ain’t that just dandy. :roll_eyes: Every time I think I’m going to have a chance at having a thoughtful discussion with a visitor, the Mods up and banish them away just as I’m making introductions. I think I’m detecting a trend here. :thinking: RPK could have been a potential source of valuable information from which we ALL could have benefited. But because he was speaking in Gibberish, he is unceremoniously dismissed? And it was suspiciously right after I made my post volunteering to translate for the guy? Almost like you all were afraid of learning things you don’t want to know. Hmmm… :thinking: On a side note, I was looking forward to brushing up on my Gibberish. Yet another missed opportunity. Story of my life. So sad… :unamused:

1 Like

He was suspended three days before your “translation”. As they say, a day late and a dollar short….


Do you by any chance speak jive?


Guys, I honestly believe that he is suffering from something like schizophrenia or possibly bipolar disorder, and is off his meds.

1 Like

Isn’t amazing that anything that could possibly be testable in favor of religion is… invisible, outside of the universe/reality, requires the suspension of laws of nature/phyiscs and in your favor, need to be timeless, limitless, without form etc…

So basically, you cannot prove it.

See, there is a technically term for this my chum… it’s called… BOLLOCKS! And utter bollocks at that.

Good day.

1 Like

The schizophrenic mind is a horrible state of affairs. I would know. One is not seeing clearly. The ideas proliferate in the stew of thought which is divorced from reality. In an attempt to consolidate them, the schizophrenic attempts to organize them.

What you’ve seen is the best effort of a person attempting to organize the insanity of their mind. You should really not be too harsh on such people. I think the best thing for them is to be removed from a platform like this. Good job Mods.

Ohhhh. The extreme lengths to which one can suffer. There seems to be no limit to how much pain and anguish a person can feel and experIence. I’m not back, btw. Just dropping in. Looking for shits and giggles. Found a sad display of mental illness and wanted to chime in.