Does Geometry prove a God's Existence?

[Koolish]

as far as i can define, you have to put "belief" into something you haven't experienced with your 5 senses.

now no one reply with some retarded "yo your senses are just electricity, drop the knowledge", the 5 senses are the only way a human being can experience something.

[sweet sista]

true, however you can't condemn all beliefs just cuz they were passed by mama and papa. you have to examine them-beliefs- and experience them and see if they got a true value.

beside knowledge itself is something that was passed during the centuries and so the philosophies. so to say i have to drop a belief just cuz it was passed by our ancestors TO ME. it's like me saying to you, drop knowledge just coz it was passed by those who came before you.

if you want to know the truth in a belief i think the best thing to do is to check it the same way as you would examine theories. Once alone and once you build on others if theirs were right. Anyway, to check that a theory is correct, you have to be a theorist or a really an expert student. you can't be an actor or a broadcaster and still want to prove a theory is wrong. you have to know the exact diminutions to what you're condemning not cuz it's a religious thing but just to be true and fully aware.

And the reason i'm mentioning this, is when someone is going to condemn a belief. I think he/she really should start checking the main source to that belief, How is the source explained exactly? Who did start that belief?

you should check more than one resource and after you complete your "KNOWLEDGE" about it. i think then, one can hit the right spot where it hurts most and prove that a certain belief is fake.
but using people's ignorance in certain things OR analyzing some beliefs without full KNOWLEDGE about them isn't a professional behavior.

[ARRCIMEDES]

This Thread Will Fry My Brain And Thats Saying Something For Someone Who Is Living In Iraq

[adedwutang]

sorry if i only read the first post but i just have some comical criticism here. i dont think there is any force or rule that causes a triangle to always have all angles equal 180 degrees, because if it didnt equal 180 degrees, then we wuldnt call it a triangle. theres no force stopping it. whe just make a boundary up that says if it exceeds this, then it is no longer what we previously defined it as. i dont kno, just droppin the first thing that came to my head
get at me-

[My First Timbs]

u are exactly correct..
a triangle is a humanoid concept.. we created the concept of a triangle.. so its our logic that causes them to adgere to the alleged natural laws

[MathMatician]

Just Like How The Human Body Is Symmetric, Mo'fuggaz!

[MathMatician]

Well...most Human Bodies....bless The Disfigured =(

[My First Timbs]

lol

[june181972]

Is geometry or any form of math and science man made, or did man have to discover, uncover, and knowledge the facts/properties that were always there?

Just because it took man an unspecified amount of time to figure something out, or understand soemthing, does not mean when that thing is understood it then becomes man made.

If I go out and get some silk and rayon, then proceed to sew some panties, did I actually create something?
No. I made some panties from materials that were created however long ago. And at some point someone decided to name panties, panties.

Labeling, naming, or classifying things is what man does after they understand what that thing is.

One can only discover what is already there. But it got here somehow.

Does math or science prove there is a God or gods?
Ask yourself this question: How did or does Zero become One?

[june181972]

Originally Posted by My First Timbs

u are exactly correct..
a triangle is a humanoid concept.. we created the concept of a triangle.. so its our logic that causes them to adgere to the alleged natural laws

Its a humanoid "concept"

We created the concept of a triangle?

If so, where do the "natural laws" come from?

[My First Timbs]

the natural laws we speak of are properties of our reality as we perceive it.

from that, we develop methods and systems to explain and fit the model so that it makes sense to us.

its our way of explaining the world we live in by creating generalizations and rules.

[june181972]

Originally Posted by My First Timbs

the natural laws we speak of are properties of our reality as we perceive it.

from that, we develop methods and systems to explain and fit the model so that it makes sense to us.

its our way of explaining the world we live in by creating generalizations and rules.

So are you saying a triangle is only a triangle because that is how we perceive it?

Does a triangle have 180 degrees or not?
I understand that the 180 is how we have come to lable it through time but it is still a triangle. Right?
If man had "labled" it as something else, it would still be a triangle at the end of the day.

If a natural law is based on "our" perception, does that not make natural laws man made? Thus nothing is "natural"

Can we perceive something that is not there?
Or do we lable and explain it mathematically/scientifically after we have researched, studied, and understood it.

The scientific method is a sort of a check and balance system to create a solid foundation for the eventual understanding of something natural.
It helps us explain the world we live in, but it does not create the world.
The lable or classification or whatever is simply language to explain a natural occurence. Give it a different classification or use different language it is still a triangle.

Man might have drawn a triangle in the dirt 50 trillion years ago, but does that mean he created it? (the true essence of creation)

With all do respect My 1st Timbs, and pardon me if I am missing your point,
but your implication of perception = reality is as unscientific as a mystery God.
Which by the way I do not believe in either.

[whitey]

Originally Posted by june181972

So are you saying a triangle is only a triangle because that is how we perceive it?

Does a triangle have 180 degrees or not?
I understand that the 180 is how we have come to lable it through time but it is still a triangle. Right?
If man had "labled" it as something else, it would still be a triangle at the end of the day.

If a natural law is based on "our" perception, does that not make natural laws man made? Thus nothing is "natural"

Can we perceive something that is not there?
Or do we lable and explain it mathematically/scientifically after we have researched, studied, and understood it.

The scientific method is a sort of a check and balance system to create a solid foundation for the eventual understanding of something natural.
It helps us explain the world we live in, but it does not create the world.
The lable or classification or whatever is simply language to explain a natural occurence. Give it a different classification or use different language it is still a triangle.

Man might have drawn a triangle in the dirt 50 trillion years ago, but does that mean he created it? (the true essence of creation)

With all do respect My 1st Timbs, and pardon me if I am missing your point,
but your implication of perception = reality is as unscientific as a mystery God.
Which by the way I do not believe in either.

if we called a triangle a square, it would be called a sqaure.

nothing is anything but its substance without humans naming it.

[june181972]

Originally Posted by whitey

if we called a triangle a square, it would be called a sqaure.

nothing is anything but its substance without humans naming it.

Exactly

We do not "create" the substance we just give it a name
We us a word, a form of language, to communicate to one another

We are not speaking anything into existence

A baby cries and srceams and hollers before he/she has the knowledge of language to say "I am hungry"
The phrase "I am hungry" does not create the sensation of an empty stomach

[da kid toney]

Booh!