answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

It cannot.

  • Answer 2:

Consider the evidence and decide for yourself.

  • Theoretical physicist and popular science writer Paul Davies (whose early writings were not especially sympathetic to theism) states concerning the fundamental structure of the universe, "the impression of design is overwhelming" (Davies, 1988, p. 203).
  • The laws of the universe seem to have been set in such a way that stars, planets and life can exist. Many constants of nature appear to be finely tuned for this, and the odds against this happening by chance are astronomical.
  • "To the unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favor of special creation" (Corner, E.J.H., Contemporary Botanical Thought).
  • "Nine-tenths of the talk of evolutionists is sheer nonsense, not founded on observation and wholly unsupported by facts. This museum is full of proofs of the utter falsity of their views. In all this great museum, there is not a particle of evidence of the transmutation of species" (Dr. Etheridge, Paleontologist of the British Museum).
"To postulate that the development and survival of the fittest is entirely a consequence of chance mutations seems to me a hypothesis based on no evidence and irreconcilable with the facts. It amazes me that this is swallowed so uncritically and readily, and for such a long time, by so many scientists without murmur of protest" (Sir Ernest Chain, Nobel Prize winner).
  • Mutations are harmful, not beneficial. One of the tasks of DNA and of long-term breeding is to avoid or repair any changes brought about by mutations. This means that our genetic apparatus is programmed to resist change.
  • You need DNA to make DNA. No genetic code can be demonstrated to have arisen by chance, together with the ability to read that code and carry out its instructions. Information does not arise spontaneously; and there is an incredible amount of information in even the tiniest cell.
"A living cell is so awesomely complex that its interdependent components stagger the imagination and defy evolutionary explanations" (Michael Denton, author).
"The astounding structural complexity of a cell" (U.S. National Library of Medicine).
Concerning a single structure within a cell: "Without the motor protein, the microtubules don't slide and the cilium simply stands rigid. Without nexin, the tubules will slide against each other until they completely move past each other and the cilium disintegrates. Without the tubulin, there are no microtubules and no motion. The cilium is irreducibly complex. Like a mousetrap, it has all the properties of design and none of the properties of natural selection" (Michael Behe, prof. of biophysics).
  • "The concept of abiogenesis is not science. It's fantasy" (J.L. Wile, Ph.D.).
User Avatar

Wiki User

โˆ™ 6y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: Can logic prove the existence of God?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Related questions

How did Rene Descartes prove god's existence?

Rene Descartes philosophy of logic and rationality led him to come to the conclusion that God must exist. Without his existence, there is not explanation for the universe.


Can you prove that fairies are not real?

No. Any person trained in logic will tell you that 'you cannot prove a negative'. If you want to disprove the existence of fairies you first attempt to try and prove their existence. And the best you can do is to fail to prove it. The option to prove it always exists.


Where can you find the video of the proof of God's existence?

There is no proof of God existing, though there is also no proof that he doesn't. It's all a matter of belief, until we can prove or disprove God's existence.


Do we have scientific proff of the existence of God?

Science doesnโ€™t have the processes to prove or disprove the existence of God. Science studies and attempts to explain only the natural world while God, in most religions, is supernatural.


All words of English vocabulary with their meaning and synonyms and antonyms?

Only if you can disprove/prove the existence of God.


What is the relationship of philosophy to logic?

Humans use their logic to reach to conclusions, even when they believe they are not. In that way, logic is closely related to philosophy. Most philosophers use logical arguments to argue in favour of what they believe - even for matters that seem to be a matter of faith only, like the existence of God (e.g. Godel, who was the greatest logician after Aristotle, has written a logical proof of God's existence).


The arguments of Aristotle were used later in the Middle Ages by Thomas Aquinas and other theologians to prove the existence of?

God


What proves God is not real?

Most philosophers would say that it is impossible to disprove the existence of god(s), because it is usually not possible absolutely to prove a negative. It can only be proventhat God is highly improbable. As in all arguments about existence or non-existence, the responsibility to provide the proof falls on those who claim that God does exist. In almost two thousand years of Christian argument fo the existence of God, that proof has not been forthcoming.


Do ghosts prove the existence of God?

The only valid proof of the existence of ghosts or of gods or of anything at all is the proof by example. Someone must produce a ghost or a god or a heffalump which is verified by the senses (non-distorting aids like telescopes, microscopes, and amplifiers are OK, transformative aids like Photoshop are not) of experts judged to be credible both by believers in the idea in question and by nonbelievers. Until a ghost or a god is produced for public evaluation their existence may be considered doubtful but unproven.


What in your own words was Thomas Aquinas' argument for the existence of god?

here be me thomas aquinas own argument to say that god is real i can prove bye the holy spirit


What did the line spectrum prove the existence of?

the existence of released energy


What is the agnostic?

There is no "the" agnostic. An agnostic is a person whom does not see enough evidence to prove or disprove God's existence, and they don't really dwell on it.