http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel's_ontological_proof
Cliff Notes:
When can no greater be conceived? Can we conceive infinity+1 ? If we can't, but we BELIEVE it exists, then God exists in our understanding. If God exists in OUR understanding (which is pathetic since we can't even sum divergent series), how can he not exist in ALL reality?
^^^^^How is this not a proof of intelligent design? If you can't conceive something you believe to exists, then something greater than you must have designed it! You nikkaz man.
You don't see anything wrong with your assumption? The assumption is taking Goedel's proof to leading logically to God (with a capital "g"), rather than to something greater than which a logician can conceive - i.e. supernatural being(s) or the universe/universes. Both have their logical and non-logical merits. Again,. I invite you to actually look at Goedel's proof and see what it actually shows.
Second, we can conceive of sets of infinity, so, to some extent we can describe a set describing infinite numbers and add one to it. Not sure why you think that argument adds anything constructive to Goedel's ontological proof.
Third, it might be that we are using different terminologies, but again, acceptance of the theory of evolution does not preclude theism. One can (and many do) accept the theory of evolution and be a theist. Now, with that out of the way, conceiving of deities really isn't evidence for intelligent design. Logically speaking, the conception is merely evidence of said deity potentially existing.
Finally, the inability to conceive of something is either evidence of the thing being a logical impossibility (Invisible Pink Unicorn, for instance. Or, for another, an immanent yet transcendent god), or the limited scope of the mind. It isn't proof of any gods.
I have no words for your breh.
Wait, you didn't actually think atheists had the exclusive rights to the theory of evolution, did you? Most of the people that accept evolution are theists. Some of the best biologists that study and teach the theory are Christians, etc.
Go exchange your philosophies elsewhere breh, you desecrating our temple of learning
I see you've appointed yourself guard of the "temple of learning". Cool.
Breh we used Newtonian physics for almost 250 years before Einstein, Planck, Bohr, etc came along.
Not quite. The flaws in Newtonian physics had been apparent many decades before any of them appeared on the scene. Many scientists had been working on the problems inherent in Newtonian physics (particularly the gravity problem) before Einstein, building on their works, finally nailed it in an ingenious manner. Einstein's theories will be superseded some day, and the groundwork is being laid in much the same way it was laid before Einstein.
what we have done is not, we have merely just applied their breakthroughs to real life situations. DNA cloning is based on isolating endonucleases, and inserting them into bactera that replicate DNA, but isolation of nuclei and molecular biology theory has been here since the 1870s. Applying theories is not the same as creating new ones. Please also note this is a total deviation from the original thread topic.
Yes, and it's a huge deal to make that grand step from spotting and splicing DNA to cloning a mammal. It's a huge fukking deal. A monumental breakthrough. That's the same thing with science while Einstein, Bohr, Planck et al. were practising it. Don't over-glamourise it. From the improvements made by - encapsulated in the main figureheads of - Einstein, Bohr, Heisenberg, Pauli ... quantum theory has galvanised the world of physics. That's just to expand on my earlier example. These too are exciting days in science. You, perhaps, aren't following any of sciences too closely.
And I know we've diverged from the original topic, but you brought it up and I responded accordingly.
Yes, and neither was Godel, finally something we can agree on
Oh, I suspect we agree on more things. Then again, I never made an assertion about the goings of computers, so
, how did y'all prove this, the professor straight up told me "Don't think, just believe". 
I never forgot because that's the EXACT same thing the pastor at the church I used to go to as a kid used to say.
let's have a look see at the basis of your great math, natural numbers. Well I can't believe it, these numbers ain't loyal!
Can I join your religion of math?"
). It is what it is breh, yo, let me know if you computer has defined pi yet
