Serious Problems with Atheism

[Pulse]

Ah, here we go with the "stop persecuting me" crap again. You've been acting like an ass for a while now, so people are treating you like an ass. I feel no sympathy for you. Maybe treat atheists better next time and atheists will react more positively to you.

I am Falsely accused of lying and quoting Dawkins out of context, then verbally abused, and it's all my fault? Really?

---

oh, Pulse.... I'll be so disappointed if you don't turn out to be a poe.

But just in case, can you stop spewing creatard's skewed view of science and actually acknowledge real science?
No, you can't, can you?
Well then, just try to think for yourself. Why is it that you believe what you believe?
Why do you call it belief, instead of knowledge?
Sure, you sometimes sugar-coat it and call it knowledge - knowing in your heart - but down deep... in your gut, you know it's just belief. unjustified, baseless belief. My question to you is if you can trace the origins of your belief.
From conception in your mother's womb to this present state, what was the psychological path that has led you to believe in what you believe?

Compare your path to that of other believers, particularly, believers in other deities, other religions.

Then explain to those other believers why your belief is worthy of more attention than theirs.

And only then explain why your belief is worthy of more attention that all the justified belief, commonly known as knowledge, that science has gathered since its inception.
And neurosurgeons commenting on cosmology make no more of a compelling case than a photographer commenting on nuclear fusion.

Your gotcha arguments from ignorance are not convincing to anyone. Try to understand why that is, instead of hammering on the same soundless key.

I explained why I believe what I believe, and copiously quote scientists, including a neurosurgeon, and even atheists themselves to prove that Materialistic Atheism is on shaky foundations which 

makes Theism more plausible, Science is based on preconceived Ideas, on funding the Scientific Dogmas endlessly and not letting "a Divine foot in the Door" , I am suggesting that's an insincere search for Truth. 

Please see; "Dogmatism in Science and Medicine: How Dominant Theories Monopolize Research and Stifle the Search for Truth" by Henry H. Bauer.

I'll quote another scientist, so its obvious my concerns are shared by other scientists;

“People need to be aware that there is a range of models that

could explain the observations” Ellis argues. “For instance, I can
construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its
centre, and you cannot disprove it based on observations.” Ellis has
published a paper on this. “You can only exclude it on philosophical
grounds. In my view there is absolutely nothing wrong in that.
What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using
philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology
tries to hide that.” (Emphasis mine) Gibbs, W.W., Profile: George F.R. Ellis; Thinking Globally, Acting Universally, Scientific
American 273(4):50–55, 1995.