The title of the journal article in not accurate given the study design and findings. What this article really is looking into is the fact that the brain can symphonize these feelings of a divine being. The articles title is only created to make people become interested in the article. It makes it seem that there is actual concrete evidence in the article that god exists. The article is simply the existence of part of the brain which symphonies the idea of a greater being. The parts of the brains creates these thoughts of some mystical events however doesn’t give any evidence of god. There are three reasons why findings are not justified. The first problem is that the test is massively biased. This is due to the people participating in the study all believe in the same god and none are atheist. So if there were any evidence for the “God spot” they would be less likely to report it. Secondly is that they are using quantitative evidence because we do not know if that the events the nuns were thinking about real events or that they were simply made up by the nuns. Thirdly what does the evidence actually show? It still shows that the brain creates these events; even though it is not just one center it is multiple. To make the experiment more valid it would have been sensible for the experimenters to make the nuns make up a story and see if some of the same areas of the brain light up because in this experiment it implies that the stories the nuns are giving are not made up.
The conclusions the news report & headline implies is that the report implied that there is no such thing as god. It implies that the brain creates these feelings and these feelings can be artificially generated, proven by Micheals Persingers research where he stimulated the emporal lobes. This result was not really covered by the title this is because according to the title it seems that concrete evidence for the existence was being presented. The only study they gave which supposedly gave concrete evidence which supported the existence of god was greatly flawed due to being extremely biased and that it really didn’t create concrete evidence it simply reviled that unlike before we now know that multiple centers in the brain activate when thinking about miracles rather then one. This does not support the idea that god exists. However the article did the exact opposite due to it showed that the brain creates all feelings of “sense presence “ which can also be done artificially.