I Know That God Does Not Exist

I don't even care whether the idea of a deity is rational or not. But it's interesting that you can't show us exactly what is irrational about it.

I've shown you my opinion. If you don't like it, you're welcome to try to rebut.

Plainly we can, we've been saying all sorts of stuff about it for thousands of years. Certainly we've made zilch progress so far. Can we definitively say we never will? Not to my mind.Does this mean that I think it a real possibility - no it's obvious garbage. But that's not real knowledge, just my opinion.

Well yes, I suppose it's physically possible to say anything about anything.

a lot also depends on what the jar was intended for. McDonalds menu was never intended for sharkfin soup. Stiles brain, managed by him, was never intended to have God in it because Stile deemed God unnecessary. Thus the brain remained void of God the same way that the jar is now void of peanut butter...except for the added fact that Stile never labled his brain as "containing God". You wont find something in a place you never intended to put it...withing your own personal realm of control.On the other hand, we often misplace things. Absentmindedly. Maybe the knowledge of good and evil symbolically misplaced God. Instead of a jar of peanut butter(whether or not previously full) we now have a jar of peanut butter and snake venom. Which nobody wants to open. The intended use of the contents is now spoiled....

I think it's a good sign that we're not just taking sides. Tangle and I have disagreed with each other too on many occasions.

Don't kid yourself. You're not off the hook yet. I'm still waiting for an answer to my question and until you provide one I'm going to continue pointing out that you can't. What's the difference with God? The question was: Is it a rational idea or an irrational idea? And can it be falsified?

Not at all. It's like looking into an empty peanut butter jar and saying I'll have to look elsewhere for peanut butter.

I couldn't care less about your opinion. I've been asking you for facts.

Anyone saying they can effect the status on "what we know about God's existence" without using rational testing.Just show me what your rational testing is for determining that I can't say "I know that God does not exist" and you're golden.

Don't be silly. There's no God, right in front of you. You don't have to look for Him at all. I am demonstrating to you that God does not exist. It isn't likely that both of our imaginations don't-see-Him-when-He's-actually-there at the same time. Exactly.
Enough = rational places rationally tested according to the rational information available to us.
Done. For the last few thousand years. I'm not saying I know sharkfin soup doesn't exist. This point is therefore irrelevant. We've been through this already. If you think you can rationally defend this, please do.
So far you have not been able to.
What rational reason do you have to suggest that God may exist in another rational location?

Indeed. But when there are no effects there to study then what are we studying?What are we going to find out besides that there are no effects to study?

Only you are saying that. You've made the only argument a scientific test which is fine by me. We've done this. Several times. Science knows what it knows so far. It has a habit of finding out more. So to say that something that science knows nothing about doesn't exists is non-scientific.Obviously the fact that science is pushing back belief and is not finding a god anywhere, means that we can conclude, tentatively, that there is none. Pending further evidence. But absolutely *know* it for sure? Nonsense.

Can it ever really be empty? It still has air in it. And even if you remove the air from it there are still the gravitational and magnetic fields that permeate space. What would "empty space" really mean?

We're just studying the universe as it appears to us with whatever tools we can develop. We'll see what occurs. Well I say nothing. But that's not something anyone can be totally sure about.