Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position

[Peebothuhlu]

Nope. Sorry.

You're using the word "cause" in its modern sense. This is what Aristotle would call "efficient cause." 

For Aristotle, a cause is anything that must be the case for something else to be the case. 

So for example hydrogen atoms are a cause of the sun (one of many). Because hydrogen atoms must exist, and have the properties they do, for the sun to exist. But this doesn't mean that hydrogen atoms are the efficient cause of the sun.  

For uranium or other isotopes to decay, several things must be the case. The laws of nature must be as they are, the isotopes must have the nature they do, time must pass, etc. etc.. The fact that the atoms "do their thing," and have a "thing" that they "do" is included in what Aristotle would call a cause. 

But we've already gotten away from the point, which is that a clear (though difficult) definition of God exists.

Uhm... no?

Hydrogen atoms are not actually the 'Cause' for any sun. Other factors also apply.

There might be a 'Clear' definition for a diety. having such a thing fdoes not actually make such a thing exist. We hca clear defintions for Unicorns, Pixies, Leannan Shyde, etc... such things are not beholden to exist because we have definitions for them.

Our minds can not define reality into existance Bel. Reality will do what ever the fek it wants and dayum hominids to extinction if randomness descides it be so.

As for your "For uranium to decay.." bit? It just has to be a certain isotope of Uranum to fall apart at a certain frequency. 'Depleted' uranium still falls apart. So does Throium. They just do it at such a way/level/ 'Time rate' as to be rather seeming 'inert' to our monkey brains.

Now, as for the 'Why is reality the way it is?' ? Yah, that's a question, in-it?

Cheers.