(August 27, 2008 at 7:27 pm)Tiberius Wrote: Yes, but this does not dismiss the possibility of God altogether. Whilst I agree that the scientific analysis currently agrees with the lack of evidence, it doesn't rule it out completely because there is no evidence to the contrary. To say that you come to the conclusion of "impossibility" is to say that because we have not observed an 11th planet orbiting the Sun it doesn't exist. Science is the gaining of knowledge, a continuous gain. Nothing is impossible since nothing ins science is absolute.I agree with you on an intellectual level.
However, on a practical level, I find the concept of god so ludicrous that I put it on the same par of probability as Russell's Teapot - impossible to disprove but very, very improbable.
I feel that if a god existed, a cosmic mind, first source, whatever, it would probably be undetectable or unprovable by scientific means anyway. And, given that this unknowable being has no bearing or impact on my life whatsoever, it is still irrelevant enough for me to label myself "atheist"
I agree there is a possibility of the existance of god, it's just that I find that possibility too remote and irrelevant to call myself "agnostic".
Perhaps on the atheist spectrum it puts me technically as "weak atheist". peu import. I call myself atheist.
'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely? Jer 8:8
A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five. Groucho Marx
A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five. Groucho Marx
