Let me start this comment of by sharing that I don't think we disagree on much, but I do enjoy the conversation and that's why I'm replying and discussing my point of view in opposition to yours despite the fact that I think the differences are subtle at best.
When it comes to claims of whether God is real, I keep in mind that approximately 95% of the humans on planet earth have some form of spiritual belief. I also want evidence and refuse to believe without it, as you do, however I am not so quick to dismiss the opinion of 95% of the human species. Some might consider this evidence of a kind however I'm not going that far.
Considering that evidence would be a logical fallacy. What people believe doesn't have to have a direct correlation with what's true. There was a time when 95% of the people believed the Earth was flat. If you don't think it's evidence of something, why at all bring that up?
Btw, I think this number is shrinking and I would be surprised if it was really 95%, but I haven't checked as I'm not sure if it's at all relevant.
Reports of direct personal experiences of mystical experiences can be found throughout human history through to the modern day.
There are also personal reports of people hearing voices in their heads but we classify those as mental disorders most of the time. In the end, none of those are really verifiable and when people have used their personal spiritual experiences to make predictions about the world, they have turned out to be wrong.
Most religions claim that in the past people have had collective spiritual experiences that they could have verified together, but those don't seep to happen in modern times. In a way, all the miracles disappeared with the invention of the camera.
Of course science wants repeatable experiments and empirical evidence, however it could be one of those Carl Sagan 'flatland' type problems. How does a 2D being from flatland describe a 3D being when their only experience is 2D?
It depends. If the 2D reality interacts with the third unnoticeable dimension in some way be it subtly, than should be some measurable consequences of that interaction. Like the "2D sheet" vibrating ever so slightly or whatever. If there is interaction, some effects should be measurable in some way and the scientiests in the 2D world might someday discover a way to measure, explain and prove the existence of an unseen third dimension.
But if the 2D reality does not interact with anything occupying the third dimension in any way, there might never be evidence. The thing is, would postulating a third dimension would be reasonable at all as it will be an unfalsifiable claim.
But if you talk about personal experience as something that could possibly be attributed to a god of some sort, then the latter would certainly not be the case as those experiences would have to have been caused by something that can interact with the reality they are in.
I hope I managed to express this contradiction clearly.
My suggestion is for science to look to a chemical produced by the human brain and found throughout nature called 5-MeO-DMT which is reported with extremely high frequency to cause people to experience these mystical states with astounding reliability.
It's not just that, they have also used electrical fields to stimulate the brain to have similar experiences.
If there is a chemical technology that can be studied to examine the human belief in god then sceinctist who wish to finally dismiss or confirm this endless debate should be looking here.
I'm not sure that will be enough to refute the claim as many theists and deists tend to seek refuge for their belief in unfalsifiable claims. The thing is (and I think you probably agree) we should require evidence before we start making our minds up.
The reason I oppose faith is the fact that it goes against the exact thing you are advocating for here - being open to the possibility of being disproven and a belief to turn out to be incorrect.
I'm not saying the existence of god can be refuted with 100% certainty, but I am saying that believing in a god is unreasonable as it is unreasonable to believe in ferries, leprechauns, unicorns, magic and the flying spaghetti monster.
@rocking-dave Hmm, So you are an atheist ?
and Science is all what you believing in?
Sounds like Science is your Religion or God.
Let us look what really science is:
The Real Science is but a Spirit rather than a Method.
Those who stick to belive in narrow scientific method definition (esspecially by using external appatus to do experment) always against the Real Spirit of Science.
(and this is the real problem of so-called morden science we now faced)
What do you think about Scorates or those who we call Sages, do you think these kind of ancient peoples without now so-called scientific method or knowledge could posiblly have the chance to probe into some deep of the mysteries of our universe?
Or just like what you said:
As many former atheists discovered and as is documented in the Bible, everything has its root in the spiritual realm. Our physical world is merely a projection of that what is happening in the spiritual. Quantum Physics support these observations.
Also interesting to read:
Michael Talbot's The Holographic Universe
The Universe is a Holographic Projection.
Happy Sunday
The fact that a religious person might have been an atheist has nothing to do with the validity of their claims. The Bible is full of internal contradictions and hasn't been demonstrated to be true, so things in there matter only to people that have chosen to believe in it on faith.
That is a statement about quantum physics that is false. Quantum physics does not require the existence of a spiritual world to work, so claiming it supports it is fallacious. There is no real reason to come to this conclusion. If you want to talk physics, you have to be ready to talk evidence, right? What evidence do you see in quantum mechanics that would support the existence of a spiritual world?
The idea of the holographic universe is just an idea for now. And even if it turns out to be the case, there is no logical connection between a holographic universe and a spiritual world as a spiritual world would not be a necessary condition for a holographic universe to be possible.
Atheists Scientist turn to God
For me, it is not about religion. I am not religious. Thank God! Religions are false contracts with other humans in my view. Scientists who turn from Atheism to Having a Relationship with God have turned to God because of scientific evidence. Most tried to prove that God didn't exist and not only were unable to do so but their scientific skills led them to the scientific conclusion that God does exist. How are their skills and findings now that they believe in God less relevant to when they did not believe?
Bible or Not Bible
I have and am studying the Bible without finding evidence of any contradictions. It is a master piece written by 40 authors in 66 books forming ONE congruent message. Have you or are you studying the Bible? Or is your statement/belief the result of someone else's opinion? Many translations of the Bible are misleading and false. One can only arrive at the messages in the Bible by also studying the original languages. Genesis 5 is a good example. It reads like a phone book. But hidden in it foretold is the coming of Christ, encoded in the names from Adam to Noah.
QP
As for QP, the fact that a particle can be observed in two different places at the same time, and the fact that they are communicating with one another instantly - is the very definition, and in my view, proof of the existence of spiritual reality.
I do wish you all the best.
Take care.
Simply put my long theory short.
Do you Love your wife or childs?
You know for sure there is Love inside your deep heart.
And you don't need Any Scientific Method to test whether you have Love or not.
But you definitely for sure you have Love inside.
Because you have some kind of Scientific Spirit to know that your Knowing is True!