Atheism the unscientific belief (part one, two, and three)

[Ben Davis]

You clearly do not understand the human psychology...
...By not believing in something you still search in your mind for a reason not to believe.

This statement shows that it's you who has an over-simplified understanding of psychology: you do not necessarily need 'a reason not to believe'. For most people it's enough simply to not have a a reason to believe. For example, you may not believe because you have no awareness of the belief: specifically, there are plenty of gods which other people believe in that I have no clue about. In that case, I have no 'reason not to believe', I simply have an absence of belief. The same will be true for you.

Atheists always rely on science to disbelieve a possible God.

No, no, no, no, no! This is just untrue! You've been told this a hundred times! There are many reasons why people don't believe in any gods. For example most paganisms are atheistic (there are no theistic gods) however pagan atheism is based on a completely unscientific set of propositions. There are also atheists who have been raised with no religion of any kind, they simply lack the childhood indoctrination that many theisms rely on for propagation; once again, no scientific basis for the atheism. There are atheists who disbelieve on ethical or philosophical grounds: they find the concepts of worship, redemption, eternal life or any other theistic claim as unsupportable. Once again, no science needed.

There are atheists who disbelieve for scientific reasons and they may even form the majority on this board but to assume that all atheists disbelieve for that reason is a poor over-simplification that you've adopted in order to reinforce your own cognitive bias. Stop it.

Gee, i just had my dinner.

So you're sickened by Hawking's disability? That gives me insight to your personality that I think should be highlighted for our audience.

The bloke state that there is no God but where is his evidence?

Read his books, please. Start with 'A Brief History of Time' and go from there.

I didn't say that atheists are such and such.
I instead say that most of you don't care about it.

Apologies if I misrepresented your position. Let's examine your claim that with 'most don't care'. Stats show that atheists are more likely to be 'sensation seekers'. So we do smoke/drink/etc. more but that's because we're less repressed. Doesn't seem like much of religious win to me.

All this intellectual jargon to say nothing that make any sense?

By trying to blame me for your lack of comprehension, you look foolish.

If you really think that you know how the mind works why don't you tell me what is the difference between outer and inner mind?    

I did. In my response to you here, page 93, post #924.

I always said that intellectuals are losers.  

...which explains your lack of intellect. You're shooting yourself in the foot.

You just contradict yourself Ben.
First you say that science doesn't contradict atheism and then you say that science can demonstrate that claims about God are false.
Are you kidding me by telling me that science play no role in no believing?  

I've already stated why science is incapable of 'contradicting atheism' as have many others, many times. I'm not going to repeat myself again; you're not a child so stop acting like one. Also, I've never said that science can play 'no part', I've always said that it doesn't necessarily play a part. You're the one who's been making crass and erroneous generalisations.