Prove god or Allah to an Atheist.

Sure, it will take us years to finally have the enough technology to discover and understand our universe, but I mean, if we made the Hubble Telescope that is now still exploring our not only solar system, but the Milky Way galaxy (and has taken several photos of other galaxies such as NGC4424; SDSS J1038 and SDSS 4849), then I can estimate that in the next 100 years, we can have the technology to go beyond galaxies and begin exploring our universe. And if the multiverse theory is correct, I'm sure we'll have the technology to exit our universe and access other universes (even though it'll be hard, as nothing can exit a universe, not even light, but as time goes by, science advances).

I think you have too much faith in the science community. Scientists can't figure out how water got on earth, to assume that they will "soon" have the ability to figure out the origin of everything is farfetched.

format_quote Originally Posted by Auratricles

Hello, my name is Auratricles.

I am an Atheist, I believe without a doubt, that there is no god.

I believe that these holy books (Qur'an, Bible, ect) are nothing but fairy tails woven by people in ancient times as an attempt at explaining the world around them, or as a means of control over certain people.

I have come here, to see if anyone at all can make me believe in god (expect me to refute to any "proof" provided, and also for me to point out any logical fallacies I may see).

Also if you have any questions I would be happy to answer them also.

Hello,
It would probably be better to browse past threads in the comparative religion section and post responses to threads there. You may learn more about the intricacies of the arguments that way.
Good Luck.

Actually, they can.

Reading scientific books (and the Quran) is not a bad idea.

Care to elaborate on that?

^ Sure, this is somewhat off-topic, but it deserves a couple of sentences I think. =)

Scientists are pretty clear that they do not know for certain how water got on earth. On theory was that it was comets that brought water to earth. You can find an article on BBC that includes the following:

Scientists have dealt a blow to the theory that most water on Earth came from comets. Results from Europe's Rosetta mission, which made history by landing on Comet 67P in November, shows the water on the icy mass is unlike that on our planet.

This experiment occurred only three month ago.

So, as I was saying:

Scientists can't figure out how water got on earth, to assume that they will "soon" have the ability to figure out the origin of everything is farfetched.

Many animals, including humans, acquired essential 'foreign' genes from microorganisms co-habiting their environment in ancient times, according to research published in the open access journal Genome Biology. The study challenges conventional views that animal evolution relies solely on genes passed down through ancestral lines, suggesting that, at least in some lineages, the process is still ongoing.
The transfer of genes between organisms living in the same environment is known as horizontal gene transfer (HGT). It is well known in single-celled organisms and thought to be an important process that explains how quickly bacteria evolve, for example, resistance to antibiotics.

genomebiology-com-2015-16-1-50

Again genomebiology:

The researchers studied the genomes of 12 species of Drosophila or fruit fly, four species of nematode worm, and 10 species of primate, including humans. They calculated how well each of their genes aligns to similar genes in other species to estimate how likely they were to be foreign in origin. By comparing with other groups of species, they were able to estimate how long ago the genes were likely to have been acquired.

And no, they do not represent lack of function:
Some of those genes were involved in lipid metabolism, including the breakdown of fatty acids and the formation of glycolipids. Others were involved in immune responses, including the inflammatory response, immune cell signalling, and antimicrobial responses, while further gene categories include amino-acid metabolism, protein modification and antioxidant activities.

So what are they? Technical paper tries to explain this data through HGT:
The acquisition of genes from an organism other than a direct ancestor (that is, horizontal gene transfer (HGT) also called lateral gene transfer) is well known in bacteria and unicellular eukaryotes, where it plays an important role in evolution, with recent estimates suggesting that on average 81% of prokaryotic genes have been involved in HGT at some point. However, relatively few cases have been documented in multicellular organisms.

Why oh why you would document HGT in a multicellular organism?

Long story short:

They(atheist bigots) take a gene, sequence it, and then try to match the gene to other species thought to be closely related. If the gene doesn't align with genes from closely related species, they assume it's of "foreign origin."For them, it simply means finding a gene that contradicts the phylogeny. Under their evolutionary mindset, such severe phylogenetic conflict is not taken as evidence that something is wrong with the hypothesis of common ancestry.

They say "HGT" or "foreign genes," but at base all that really means is "genes that conflict with the phylogeny."

Certain birds and humans use the same genes for vocalization but those genetic abilities are absent in non-human primates and birds without vocal learning? If not derived from a common ancestor, as they clearly were not, how did the genes get there?

www-sciencedaily.com-releases-2014-12-141211142429-htm
www-sciencemag-org-content-346-6215-1256846-full-pdf

The next time you look at orange take some time to study it. After you take off the covering, look at the juicy fruit inside. The fruit is segmented. This makes it easier to eat plus you can share it with family and friends. This is God’s mercy. It could have been just been a Squishy ball of fruit yet God created it as sign for people. So the next time you eat an orange just know that God loves you and wants the best for you. Oranges are everywhere so don’t forget to take the time to ponder about it. An orange can really be deep to the right person

The network of veins on the orange helps keep it strong. This technology is used in bridges and bones mashallah.

Allah also made it possible for sceintist to remove the seed from the orange. This is also a mercy since he made it evens more easier to eat mashallah. So he is the Most merciful and He cares mashallah.

It is greater for a thing to exist in the mind and in reality than in the mind alone.
"God" means "that than which a greater cannot be thought."
Suppose that God exists in the mind but not in reality.
Then a greater than God could be thought (namely, a being that has all the qualities our thought of God has plus real existence).
But this is impossible, for God is "that than which a greater cannot be thought."
Therefore God exists in the mind and in reality.
--
The expression "that being than which a greater cannot be thought" (GCB, for short) expresses a consistent concept.
GCB cannot be thought of as: a. necessarily nonexistent; or as b. contingently existing but only as c. necessarily existing.
So GCB can only be thought of as the kind of being that cannot not exist, that must exist.
But what must be so is so.
Therefore, GCB (i.e., God) exists.
-
1960 the Princeton physicist – and subsequent Nobel Prize winner – Eugene Wigner raised a fundamental question: Why did the natural world always – so far as we know – obey laws of mathematics?
-
workings of human consciousness are similarly miraculous. Like the laws of mathematics, consciousness has no physical presence in the world; the images and thoughts in our consciousness have no measurable dimensions.

Yet, our nonphysical thoughts somehow mysteriously guide the actions of our physical human bodies. This is no more scientifically explicable than the mysterious ability of nonphysical mathematical constructions to determine the workings of a separate physical world.

Until recently, the scientifically unfathomable quality of human consciousness inhibited the very scholarly discussion of the subject. Since the 1970s, however, it has become a leading area of inquiry among philosophers.

Recognizing that he could not reconcile his own scientific materialism with the existence of a nonphysical world of human consciousness, a leading atheist, Daniel Dennett, in 1991 took the radical step of denying that consciousness even exists.

Peace be to you

atheism came around in the what 1400 hundreds?
that darwin guy spoke nonsense i looked at his booked he talked about creation and if there is a god then why do bad things happen...


You cannot deny that Jesus existed there were prophets that spoke to us

what was life like 2000 years ago...? not many atheist...

if you think computer is a great technology then what about the human mind that built it?

try going on a day without food youll understand...