Subjective Evidence of Gods

I agree with you Chuck77. Prayer answering or not is not in itself proof for or against a God. However there are appears to be research based evidence related to benefits resulting from prayer as well as spirituality. It is therefore subjective evidence for a God.There is research to suggest there are benefits in relation to prayer as the links below speak to.http://www.sciencedaily.com/...ases/2007/03/070314195638.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/...ases/2010/12/101214085328.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/...ases/2008/12/081217124156.htmI see atheists as being believers in incredible luck rather than a creator. I believe there is much more than subjective evidence for a God.Earth is the lucky planet. So far, in this universe filled with the so called seeds of life, water flying about in comets everywhere, not so much as a bacteria or algae has been found anywhere in the universe. The earth was as inhospitable as any other planet in our solar system, yet earth had to have many hundreds of lucky events fit together in just the right way and timing to result in a habitable planet. Even with these requirements present still researchers suggest life arose only once and has never arisin a second time. How fortunate are we???The magnetic field, an iron core, seasons, just the right address in the solar system, the water system, oxygenation and atmosphere, Jupiter as a protector, etc. If just one link, one event, one feature, were missing we would not be here to debate and earth would be as dead as Mars.Then one can look to abiogenesis and the fact that with all the scientific advances todate, life cannot be made from non life and the spark of life instilled by the creator into the creation alludes todays researchers and remains a Holy grail.The requirements needed to support life on a planet, including intelligent life, and reproduction are not subjective and are universally accepted.Mars supposedly had water but no life evolved. These icey comets full of water do not display the same molecular structure of earths water. Now scientists are looking to asteroids and hoping these will answer the question of how water fortunately managed to come to earth at just the right time and in sufficient quantity, to form oceans.Comets May Be the Source of Earth's Water - Universe TodayHence the requirements for life have only been realised on planet earth. The extrapolation of life arising on earth to support the arising of life on other planets is subjective.What is not subjective is the host of lucky events that resulted in planet Earth, the only viable planet known at this time to support life. That is a fact.On which God is the true God.....
There is the scientific accuracy of the bible that spoke to hygiene rules as commandments at a time where germs were unknown, staged creation supported by research, a universe devoid of life at its creation supported by research, the earth not being held up by stuctures of other organisms supported by research, the circle of the earth, the stars numbering grains of sand, the watery deep of a molten planet, the knitting of life in the womb as a descriptor of DNA at work, a book written by persons that took no glory for themselves as prophets of God unlike many prophets that took glory for themselves and generally did not lead a life in line with their teaching eg the accumulation of riches and living in shameless luxury, etc, This is what suggests the biblical Creator, the God of the bible, has some substance in light of other spiritual writings on the creation. There is much information in the bible that supports an intelligent author or some very lucky guesses by persons that went against the common thinking of the day.So atheists believe in extraordinary luck and good fortune as opposed to theists that believe there must have been more than luck involved in the long line of fortuitous events that led to the arsing of life and then intelligent life on earth.I therefore assert that the evidence for a creator is not subjective but is there to be seen and discerned by all that are seriously looking for answers.Luck or good management, is the question at hand. Is good management and design a sign of a creator or great luck? I'd say the evidence demonstrates good management and design by a creator as opposed to a plethora of lucky events perfectly timed that fortuitously resulted in life on earth.

Panda says The answer is irrelevant. Right here in our solar system there are 4 terrestrail planets that were equally as inhospitable.Now you can either argue that we have the perfect address, which agrees with my assertion, or you can refute same. If we do not have the perfect addy then there is no reason why life should not have evolved on another terestrial planet in this solar system.Every single step in the earths formation up untill the appearance of life was necessary right down to our iron core, stratosphere, magnetic field, season, hydro cycles amongst the many cycles that pertain to the earth.The perfect addy by chance or good management and design?. Atheists believe in volumes of luck. I do not.Your comment has not taken the luck out of atheist assertions for no Creator.

Coragyps says I am also an amateur astronomer although I have done some work for Siding Springs on a voluntary basis.Here is the info and link. I thought I had posted another article on it but here is another anyway."Comet LINEAR had plenty of water, but was it the same type of water found here on Earth?
Comets and Earth's oceans both contain a small amount of so-called "heavy water" composed of equal parts hydrogen, oxygen, and deuterium. (Deuterium is an isotope of hydrogen with one extra neutron in its nucleus.) The chemical formula of heavy water is HDO; normal water is H2O.There is growing evidence that comets born in the outer solar system (near Neptune's orbit, for example) contain ices relatively rich in heavy water -- too rich, in fact. They don't match the isotopic composition of water in Earth's oceans."
A Taste for Comet Water | Science Mission DirectorateBeing a smart donkey will get you nowhere with me.Now that I have destroyed your credibility you may apologise to me for your ignorance.Edited by Mazzy, : No reason given.

Bluegenes says What a ridiculous reply!Every planet in the universe is in the right circumstance to be itself and they are lifeless, so far, and all had equal opportunity to evolve life eg Mars, given that these researchers have spent huge resources in demonstrating how life can survive in lava, in sunless environments, in ice, etc.All this research is aimed at demomnstrating how the universe is seeded with the requirements of life and not so much as a confirmed bacteria to wave back at us. These are the facts. The rest is speculation.