“a the ist” – (n) a person who has concluded that since there is a lack of evidence for something others might call god, therefore god does not exist.
Marriam Webster Dictionary
WHY EVIDENCE?
We live in a world where the predominant way of thinking is based on something called “logical positivism”. In short it means you can conclude something only when it has been positively confirmed. The problem with this, is you can NOT prove a negative. (By the way, it also means you can’t rule out a conclusion based on lack of evidence as well.)
Up to now, the theists have been pushing this idea that their god (or gods) do exist – and as of yet, have not submitted any tangible proof of to atheists. While theists do come up with interesting examples, their arguments don’t rise to the level of positive empirical evidence. As a response, theists will come back and ask atheists to PROOVE that god does NOT exist – and while atheists can provide specific examples of absence, it’s impossible to prove this in total (as you can’t prove a negative).
The purpose of this site is not to prove the negative, but provide a place where we will undertake a series of experiments – through which, if shown to be true, can be used as possible evidence that god (or gods) do exist. This site aims to compile, collect and report the results of our experiments and allow god or gods a forum through which they will be able to provide the world evidence of existence.
WHAT EXPERIMENTS?
- An experiment will be posted on this site with a specific timeframe, outcome, and point scoring.
- From that point forward it is up to the god or gods to ensure that specific event or activity occurs.
- If it occurs, the god is awarded the points provided. If not, then they do not receive any points (no partial points will be given).
- After the event occurs, analysis will be undertaken to determine if the occurrence was due to explainable events, or due in large part from the gods.
- If it is found that the event was explainable, the points will be revoked.
- If, it can be shown that something explainable did in fact have unexplainable properties based on gods, then points could be revised and awarded.
- Extra points will also be awarded for reproducibility and repeatability (the first time it occurs could be reduced to random chance, it occurring more times in a row makes god more likely).
- Analysis against previous results will be used to resolve confidence levels of prior results.
HOW EXPERIMENTS?
Criteria:
- PRE-ORDAINED – the experiments will be announced ahead of time. These will be linked to our social media, as well as cached back in google way-back-machine to ensure that changes to the experiment won’t be altered after the fact, or go back to make some future outcome more align with a past event.
- UNEXPLAINABLE – while points for a successful experiment will be awarded once they occur, if they can be later explained beyond “acts of god”, then the points will be revoked. This means that the score could go down (or up) at a future date. Additionally, if something that was explainable presents new evidence that demonstrates it had components of “unexplained” behavior, we reserve the right to move something into the positive column.
- CHAOS THEORY – at a quantum level it’s very hard for us to predict or know exactly what went on, and while EVERYTHING has a level of uncertainty and deeper levels, we are concerned with the macro level here. So, things like surviving because of the skills of the doctor would NOT count as a miracle event. What might count is if there were no doctors, but then suddenly one appeared at just the right time with just the right skill set. In those instances we will need to use probability calculations along with some statistical analysis (confidence intervals).
- SIGNIFICANT – we will vary the scale and scope of experiments to allow a wide range of gods and their powers to be able to participate, starting from more generic, to more specific and more grand. As an example, in the cases where words like “win the lottery are concerned” – the winnings would need to be of a significant level (meaning 1,000 times current annual income or some other measure). These will be defined as the site progresses.
- APRIORI vs APOSTERI EVENTS – Prior to December 5, 2023 a private log of data was collected and contains previous results. These results and posts will be loaded to the site for the general public to review. As more data becomes available, the results from the site will be leveraged over previous data.
Data Collection
- Experiments will be posted as single entries on this website http://www.does-god-exist.org.
- Results will be provided as a tracking spreadsheet for independent data validation and anlysis.
- Finally discussion will be conducted as responses to posts on the “Does God Exist” website along with the corresponding Facebook Group. https://www.facebook.com/groups/doesgodsexist/
CONTACT US?
proof@does-god-exist.org
Does God Exist? 
2 responses to “How this works?”
Is this a joke? You can’t prove or disprove God with a lab experiment.
And you definitely can prove a negative.
LikeLike
Thanks for the comment!
And no, this is not a joke. It’s an experimental investigation into evidence for god – if sufficient evidence can be collected through these experiments, we can move onto deeper investigations into it’s nature and engagement with the universe.
However, I did want to ask you about proving a negative, as I am genuinely interested.
Please provide me with the process to prove a negative. You can prove the inverse of something by showing the inverse to be true, or vice versa. Both of which are done by positively confirming one state over the other.
As an example. I can prove that something is NOT in a specific location. I do this by proving that the location is empty. What I did in this instance is show a “positive” affirmation of a condition. Conversely I can prove that there is only one of an object, I can prove that an object can be only in one place at one time, and then prove that object is somewhere (anywhere other than a location). Unfortunately, we can’t reverse that and prove the reverse.
A PARABLE
You have become lost and found to be wandering in an endless desert when you come upon three djinn who will grant you any wish you desire if you can solve their argument. The djinn on the right says there is a precious grain of sand, more precious than all the others – unique and found no where else but in their expanse which stretches off forever in that direction. The one on the left claims that the grain of sand is not to the right as his brother argues, but it is definitely off to the left in his domain. The third, standing a bit back from the two claims that the grain of sand doesn’t really exist at all and her brothers are arguing over nothing.
How would you solve this dilemma and get your wish?
LikeLike