Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position

[The Grand Nudger]

If you say so...there are two possible ways that all of that true stuff can be.  One of them is absent any god.  That makes god unnecessary.

The true staff as a whole warrants an explanation, if you remove god you're not really left with any good hypothesis.
If something always existed there are two ways only : a entity that always existed or some infinite regress.

Sure, "the true stuff" requires an explanation, and not for nothing, it has one.  You simply wish to add another possibility in.  That a god turned a wrench and played in the dirt.  Like I said, fine, if you say so, but since we're considering two possible explanations - god is not necessary to the explanation.  

Do you really reject the anthropic principle?  Isn't the anthropic principle exactly why you think some god is needed?  Something has to account for the requirements of mans existence, and any cosmological notion must account for those requirements?

I don't think that you've thought this through.  Not enough to convince someone that your fairy tales are credible..and certainly not enough to convince someone to join your club, if you managed that.

I don't reject it, it's a meaningless principle to me. "We exist therefore the universe made it possible for us to exist" is really nothing.
The anthropic principle in its stronger form states : " The universe must make our existence possible ", and this already supposes a deity, I think.

If it were meaningless you wouldn't be insisting that cosmological notions are necessarily constrained to account for the existence of man and his requirements.  You're basing your argument for god on it. I'd call that meaningful. It's disastrous, but still very meaningful.

What about acknowledging that a creature that drinks water must live in a universe with water presupposes a god?  Explain that.  As far as I can tell, it only presupposes that there must be water, and some process by which water occurs, if there are water drinkers. I'll point out, again, that it's actually the existence of a creature that drinks water..in a universe without water, that would be the surprising and miraculous and potentially divine universe. For some odd reason, we just so happen to be living in the unremarkably natural one, instead.

We had a poster (can't remember who) link a video that went along the lines of how the worst thing about theism, was that it made him sound like an idiot. This is one of those times. Believers are conditioned to believe not just in superstitious shit, but to disbelieve in anything that conflicts with that superstitious shit. This damages their credibility and the credibility of their faith, tying it...for no necessary reason, to the stupid shit they say. That's why it's never taken an army of atheists to destroy a religion. They do it to themselves.

You're doing it right now. If your religion requires you to accept ignorant superstitions -and- reject tautologically true statements about the universe....then your religion is doomed. Personally, I think it's just you. That your religion would do fine, and do better, without the stupid shit that you say.