Thanks for nuttin, NC: I will blame you for my nightmare tonight!
SNR said: "King solomon the not so wise, The only true statement is "We dont know."
Firstly..I am greatful you dont work in science.
Wrongo, but way to shoot your argument down (as I look at my doctorate diploma from Cal)!
secondly... On probability and the evidence of gods invention along with lack of evidence of his existance. Saying I am 99% convinced he doesnt exist is not only NOT wishy-washy, it is kind for I am saying there is 1% chance you are right and not a blind, ignorant fool, worshing the empty space above you and praying to nothing more than an imagined egomaniac with tendency for genocide, slavery, war, incest, rape, racism, sexism and dictatorship that demands exclusive devotion, a jealous, wrathful ball bag.
A whole 1%...... Just for you!
Well, we agree; I think you should just tell them that, lol!
You're getting warm, in that I can conclusively say that the Abrahamic God as depicted in the Bible does NOT exist. Why? We have evidence from geology, history, biology (evolution), anatomy, cosmology, astronomy, archaeology, anthropology, and anything ese with -onomy/-ology/ at the end to show the Bible is a work of men and not Divine Inspiration. We understand the motives of the men who wrote the Bible, and only a fool would allow their own desires and wish fulfillment blind them to reality and apologetics required to save ancient myths as truths. The stories display logical inconsistencies that would make a creative writing student give up in shame.
NOW, do I admit there is the possibility that some OTHER unknown deistic being somewhere started life processes? It's possible, but there's absolutely no benefit to believing that: it only kicks the "who created life?" question down the road, and gets us nowhere closer to finding an answer. It's an impediment to finding the answer, intellectual laziness.
The problem with the cautious "scientific" stance is that Bible thumpers assume that ANY shadow of doubt on your part means you lose (you lack faith), when you and I know that you SHOULD always allow yourself to entertain hypotheses, remain open-minded, even for the highly-improbable.
In law, we don't demand ABSOLUTE INCONTROVERTIBLE PROOF to convict someone, because you NEVER have that. Instead, you need sufficient evidence on which to act (where extraordinary claims has a higher burden of proof). An infinitesimal possibility of being wrong doesn't handicap you from moving forward and acting on your beliefs.
As a trained physician, we have a saying: "if you hear hooves approaching, think horses, not zebras (if you're standing in California, not Africa)". This means when considering tentative diagnoses for clinical signs you see, you start with the MOST LIKELY, and work your way down to the least-likely. The same approach can be applied to any situation in life, AKA Occams Razor.
There's no demand for absolutes in ANY field of knowledge, BUT theology (and those who misunderstand practical science).
Ah, never mind: I just realized YOU may think I'm a theist?
