Is Atheism Intellectual Cowardice?

[Brian37]

Intellectually, there is not much difference between an Atheist and a Theist. As a species we have only existed for a miniscule amount of time compared to the age of the universe(~14 Billion years according to Scientists). Of this time we have only been studying Science in a rigorous sense for ~ 300 years. It is no exageration to say that, although we have learned a lot in that time, we have much to learn in the future. In fact, it is not just that we do not know everything, but we do not even know how much we don't know.

From this it follows that a claim that God does not exist can only be made on the grounds of probability, based upon current scientific knowledge. But probability is only based upon uncertainty and therefore, any claim that God does not exist must be, in the end, a belief (even if based upon the latest empirical and scientific evidence). From this perspective an Atheist and a Theist both share something in common - belief.

Atheism cannot, therefore, be ascerted based upon certain knowledge. Therefore, it follows that the truly honest position of any member of humanity is Agnostic. It is intellectual cowardice, on the part of Atheists, not to accept the rational conclusions that reason leads to - namely, that no definitive statement can be about the existence/or not of God, due to lack of knowledge.

I hate this fallacy of equivocation that gaps in scientific knowledge means anything goes by default. Cowardice is when someone tells you the earth rotates around the sun and then you have that person jailed because you don't like reality.

Whe have recorded hurricans for centuries without knowing how they manifested. Now we do the conditions that lead to them. But when we didn't, did not make Posiden the cause when we didn't know.

There is no equality in claims between science and theism. Theism is rooted in comic book pasts based on the wishful thinking of the writers of holy books and is nowhere near the high standard of testing and falsification of moderen scientific method.

FACT, thoughts require a material process. There is no scientific example of a thought occuring outside of biological evolution. Combine that with the scientific ignorance of most humans, especially in antiquity, and combine that with the fact that there is abundant evidence that humans make up gods, the meter leads to obvious. PEOPLE MAKE UP GODS.

There is lots in science we have yet to discover, but cowardice is when you refuse to throw away bad claims and simply cling to them because of some stupid sense of fairness. Human rights is not the issue, the ability to demonstrate the credibility of a claim is the issue. And so far humans have come up with only ONE universal way to test and falsify and verify claims.

AND atheism is not equal to science for that matter. Atheist can and do have varying degrees of education. All "atheist" means, is not holding a belief in a god or gods. Their justifications can be as vairied as a theist.

All claims are NOT equal by default.

"The sun is a god"
"The sun is a burning ball of gas"

If you can accept that the first is false, and the second is true, then what lead us to the fact of the second is the tool we used to know the truth. Allowing the childish mentality that claims are equal is what keeps us from future discovery.I am tired of the bullshit claim that we should never discard some ancient superstition merely because it is popular.

Intelectual cowards cling to the past. Intelectual bravery is the willingness to accept when one is wrong.

Otherwise Santa is real because children like believing it and we shouldn't upset them with the truth that he is not.