Re: Tell us why we don't believe in God
Yes, and science is based on empiricalism, relegion is not.
In your example with brain activity: there were 2 statements
1) a person has higher brain activity then usual
2) the persons says he is seeing god(through his eyes)
What makes 1) empirical is that it doesn't only rely on the trustworthyness of the speaker. 2) does. The difference is in what the statement is based on.
If a million people just say they experienced God, then it's a million statements based on the thurstworthyness of the speaker. In the example of brain activity, the sense used for observation is vision. The person who's brain is being measured appears to be the only one who is seeing god(you have to take his word for it). Everyone else who has the abiliy to see can check whether or not the brain activity is up(you don't have to trust the person who said it, you can see for yourself if you have the ability to see).
Untill this day, there have only been religious statements where you have to rely on the trustworthyness of the speaker. There hasn't been a empirical statement where you could check whether or not what the person is telling you is correct.
I agree that when i said " for everyone"(you were right not to take my word for it ) , i was incorrect. It's been a year since i saw those slides, the human memory makes mistakes sometimes. But i was right that those statements were not empirical.
There is also no proof that the universe can be explained with thourgh observation only.