Evidence that "Atheism" is not a sound belief

Yes, I do have evidence that atheism is not a sound belief. If you can't explain or prove that the universe is without design; then how can atheism be sound? Sound would mean that you have evidence there is no God; therefor being an atheist is sound.

 

Excuse me on my mistake on the semantics of science. So correct me anytime. I want to learn!

 

Thank you. Outside the realm of the "self replicating molecule" becomes the control. Everything inside this supposed self replicating molecule becomes the "Closed System".

 

You want to learn, you want to learn, teach me, I want to learn. But then when told, you ignore what is said.

 

All your opinion. And I am reading the questions Denny. Your opinion on me; ignoring the evidence; show you clearly don't want to hear my questions. I have tried to understand and I've read up on the "Big Bang" on that link you approved. I am questioning the lack of proof; which becomes my proof. When I say the universe is a closed system; you tell me I am bogus.

Problem is; you are basing that opinion on your lack of knowledge. Stating that you know, or the science world knows, is like the "blind man saying purple doesn't exist". So just because most of the scientific world doesn't believe God exists doesn't mean that God doesn't exist.

 

wrong... I have learned more in the last month on these threads that I have my entire life. And how can you prove I'm ignoring the facts? First of all, in science it's not facts; it's evidence, theory and testing. I am questioning the orgin of life and Atheism. And I still haven't had "evidence" that supports that God doesn't exist. So I do want to learn. I don't know in the science world. And I am looking for evidence to give me proof that God doesn't exist.

 

Wait so we are talking about Earth or the Universe?

 

You are again lumping all atheists into the "strong atheism" category. Please get this straight:

• Abence of belief in something doesn't require proof of nonexistence. In fact it is COMPLETELY impossible to prove that ANYTHING does not exist!
• Ignorance is not evidence of a higher power -- it is simply evidence that we do not have all of the answers.

 

Ah okay, so then calling someone ignorant because they believe in God is justified then? So would you agree that this is false?

 

I think it's completely unjustified to call theists any more or less ignorant than anybody else.

EDIT: On average, I mean. There are educated minds and total buffoons within both camps.

 

You can call me "straw man" for claiming the Universe is a "Close System"; but I call you blind man arguing the color purple doesn't exist. If the universe is "infinite" then anything outside this universe becomes the "Open System". Everything inside the universe is now the "Closed System". Correct me if I'm wrong here.

Also, for those of you that think I'm closed minded; I got news for you. Before we started talking about "God" I believed the world was 10k years, I also believed the universe was 7 (God days old). I also believed that evolution cannot be possible. I also didn't think about anything outside the Earth.

Now I am open to evolution, believe the universe can be 17 billion years old and the Earth can be a few billion years old. So who is closed minded here?

 

Okay, so then you can agree that theism could be right?

 

Because it is equating an indefensible claim (those phenomena happened via intelligent design) with a claim that needs no defense (we don't know how those phenomena happened). People that believe that God doesn't exist only do so because there is no way of testing for God, and have this belief in the same way that they do not believe that the Invisible Space Pickle exists.

 

Now you are getting it! And hopefully you can have respect for those that have faith in God. Because Atheism requires a bit of Faith as well. Because in reality; Atheism cannot prove theism wrong. Am I reading you correctly?

 

I totally agree with this statement. I've seen some wacko theists and atheists.

 

Absolutely. And (contrary to popular opinion, it seems) I think most atheists would agree with me that there is always a "could be" in there.

And before we get into another semantic shitstorm, "agnosticism" (as defined by Huxley, the guy who invented the term) is a methodology of separating fact from fiction, based on the concept that we are all ignorant. It is not separate and incompatible with atheism. It is a statement of knowledge, while atheism is a statement of belief:

Of course I realize that the popular definition of the word has gotten warped, and that many use it as synonymous with "soft atheism". Whatever. If you want to call an atheist an agnostic because they don't have proof of god's nonexistence, that's up to you -- just be aware that these are not the strict or originally intended meanings for either of these words.

 

A lack of belief in God(s) doesn't require faith. That's like saying thinking that the tomato I bought isn't the reincarnation of Hitler requires faith. There's absolutely no scientific evidence suggesting it is Hitler, and the crazy man down the street who shouts it into my window every morning isn't a valid source of evidence. There are no faith-based beliefs required for me to come to this conclusion because it is readily apparent that the tomato isn't Hitler due to the overwhelming lack of evidence.

Atheism isn't there to "prove theism wrong," theism holds the burden of proof, since atheism is the default position.

 

Which is why my arguments on "Atheism is not a sound Belief". I am not saying being "Agnostic" isn't sound. I am explaining the belief of "Atheism" is not sound.

Which I 100% agree on. I am bringing up an argument and it is up to those that read to make up their own mine. I believe I have logically given a case. I find it funny that people think I'm some looney for questioning the Atheistic belief.

I still have 7 others, and I will put them down later tonight. I have my notes at home, so I can't give it here at work.