Theists: What is the most compelling argument you have heard for Atheism?

[Brian37]

Why? Ochams razor does not need convoluted arguments.

Your choices are.

1. There really is a divine/spirit/god world.

Or.

2. Humans make them up.

Out of those choices which seems to be more likely? Is it likely Apollo is real or made up? Is it likely that Thor is real or made up? Would using fine tuning convince you of those gods? No? Why not? If it works for you and is an unbias tactic then it should work for everyone who wants to use it including any other religion.

Now, think about all the dead mythologies and other god claims and religions you don't buy. Why is it you reject all others besides yours? If using science to argue for another religion doesn't convince you to convert to another religion, why should I give you any special treatment?

If others here want to wade through your bad tactic sentence by sentence, they are more than welcome to. I am simply cutting to the chase, and trying to jar you out of your fantasy at a quicker pace.

What you don't seem to understand, and I think just about everyone has pointed out to you; is that this is just a generic argument for a God/god.  Be it a deistic God, or another one.   All you are doing is showing your ignorance.    Now one of the things you may notice, if you think about the various fallacies, is that  a good many of them are fallacious, because they don't deal with the reasons for or offer any reasons against.   This is largely what you are doing here.  You are avoiding the argument, and I might at keep appealing to feelings.   That's not going to cut it.   Your question of why I reject other gods, and the science doesn't convince me of them... is  moot.   That is because you don't understand the reasons being put forth, and are just making yourself look foolish.

I was born at night, just not last night. Been at this for 16 years.  "Generic" is a temporary tactic to distract to eventually draw you back to their specific club/deity when they cant make a direct appeal, "Am not arguing my club". 

Ok fine.

Science=generic "deistic"  God/god still suffers the same problem still competing with those with a particular named club. 

Still the same lack of evidence as the specific Allah/Yahweh/Jesus/Buddha/Brahama. 

Now what?

 Your question of why I reject other gods, and the science doesn't convince me of them...is moot

Code for "I don't have to explain to you why I reject all those others".

Not on a message board no. But in a real lab compare and contrast are what control groups are for, and what independent peer review is for, IN A REAL LAB. You without realizing it,or flat out lying and don't care, are suffering from selection bias and sample rate error. I could care less if you want to now cop out to a "generic god".

No the reason you rejection all those other claims besides your own personal belief is that you, like everyone else is not willing to admit it still ultimately amounts to "I like my own personal position". Yea, so what. So do most of the 7 billion humans with all sorts of specific or, "generic" god beliefs. Your position is very relevant just like anyone else trying to say science points to their personal claim. We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts. So again, if you had anything, it could be neutrally compared without your own personal bias creeping in. So if you are truly being objective you and you think you are on the right track, you should not be afraid of using those other claims as part of a larger sample to compare to. If you compare your own claim as part of a larger sample and others can replicate the same data/method and come to the same conclusion, then you prove yourself right. Being stuck in your own echo chamber proves nothing.