欧宝娱乐

“It was here that the thaum, hitherto believed to be the smallest possible particle of magic, was succesfully demonstrated to be made up of /resons/ (Lit.: 'Thing-ies') or reality fragments. Currently research indicates that each reson is itself made up of a combination of at least five 'flavours', known as 'up', 'down', 'sideways', 'sex appeal' and 'peppermint'.”
― Terry Pratchett, Lords and Ladies

“Reasonableness is a matter of degree. Beliefs can be very reasonable (Japan exists), fairly reasonable (quarks exist), not unreasonable (there's intelligent life on other planets) or downright unreasonable (fairies exist).

There's a scale of reasonableness, if you like, with very reasonable beliefs near the top and deeply unreasonable ones towards the bottom. Notice a belief can be very high up the scale, yet still be open to some doubt. And even when a belief is low down, we can still acknowledge the remote possibility it might be true.

How reasonable is the belief that God exists? Atheists typically think it very unreasonable. Very low on the scale. But most religious people say it is at least not unreasonable (have you ever met a Christian who said 'Hey, belief in God is no more reasonable than belief in fairies, but I believe it anyway!'?) They think their belief is at least halfway up the scale of reasonableness.

Now, that their belief is downright unreasonable might, in fact, be established empirically. If it turned out that not only is there no good evidence of an all-powerful, all-good God, there's also overwhelming evidence against (from millions of years of unimaginable and pointless animal suffering, including several mass extinctions - to thousands of children being crushed to death or buried alive in Pakistan earthquake, etc. etc. etc.) then it could be empirically confirmed that there's no God.

Would this constitute a 'proof' that there's no God? Depends what you mean by 'proof'. Personally I think these sorts of consideration do establish beyond any reasonable doubt that there is no all-powerful all-good God. So we can, in this sense, prove there's no God.

Yet all the people quoted in my last blog say you cannot 'scientifically' prove or disprove God's existence. If they mean prove beyond any doubt they are right. But then hardly anything is provable in that sense, not even the non-existence of fairies.”
― Stephen Law

“It's all鈥攍et's use a very specific word here鈥攎iraculous. You, me, love, quarks, sex, chocolate, the speed of light鈥攊t's all miraculous, and it always has been.”
― Rob Bell, What We Talk about When We Talk about God

“Quarks and Waves.
The biggest is equally distant from nothingness as the smallest is. There is equidistance from nothingness to the biggest and the smallest. If we look at an electron, it appears to be a particle and a wave. The notion of a particle as a wave comes from the fact that we cannot measure its position simultaneously when we measure its momentum (velocity). This is Heisenberg鈥檚 uncertainty principle. If we look at a particle, it is a particle; when we do not look at it, it is a wave. The sheer identification of the particle at the moment we look at it does not mean that we, or instruments, changed its nature but just identified it as such. It is not identified and appears to be a wave when we do not look at it. On this level, being a particle or a wave almost does not make a difference because this is 鈥渘ear鈥� the 鈥減oint鈥� or 鈥渘ear鈥� the passage from the Ultimate Immaterial Reality to our sensory reality. These are the passages from one sphere into another. At this level of infinitesimal values that instruments cannot even register, we face a wavelike particle behavior moving at an extreme speed.

This feature (or what appeared to be a feature to our senses) of a particle may result from its almost infinitesimal size rather than its intrinsic value. To be more precise, a particle's inherent value is independent of our ability to perceive, measure, or comprehend it. We may grasp it to some extent or point, but its intrinsic value may still be beyond our ability and the ability of the technology or instruments we rely on.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE