Positive Atheism

[Purple Rabbit]

1. I'm fairly certain I stated I wasn't good at debate and I didn't come here to argue. Merely to learn and debate, (however poor ill equiped I am) seems a method to understanding atheism and agnosticism (not that they're directly related).

I'm experiencing considerable problems in decrypting your sentences, so you will have to excuse me that my interpretation not always aligns with your intended meaning. Are you using automatic online translation?
Also debate is use of arguments so we argue in that sense.

2. I try to accept a plethera of possibilities. Illiteration aside, in science isn't a theory postulated based on observation. tested, observed, and qualified?What do you base theory off of if not observation? Before you say imagination (which is an observation of subconscious imagery) I'm seriously just asking the question to understand the process.

In science (except for mathematics) it is indeed based on observation. What makes you think it isn't.

3. I'd like to read up on any uncaused effects you know of. please point me to the books.

That would be books on quantum physics (QM) and nuclear physics (NP). I can point you to some internet sources though. Be aware however that causation in philosophy has multiple definitions. Uncaused in the sense I use here is that there is no particular identifiable event triggering the effect. The most notable uncaused phenomena are virtual particle pair creation (QM), verified through the Casimir-effect and nuclear decay (NP).

4. It would only be circular logic that "In our universe cause preempts effect. I have stated elswhere that God is the cause therefore the explaination is the effect." If you're under the assumption that God exists only in our universe which I didn't state.

Yes, you implicitly did by stating "In our universe cause preempts effect." (underling by me). And rephrasing your statement to "In and outside our universe cause preempts effect." makes it nonsensical, since it is not clear what outside the universe means and if your cauation rule applies on the treshold between inside and outside.

My best assumptions on God would be that he exists outside the ruleset existing within our known universe. I agree though, we should stick to religion and keep God and the divine out of it

There you go. If god is outside the ruleset, than you cannot apply the ruleset to god and your claim about causation does not apply.

No you misunderstood. What I know of evolution was that we developed from primates, started walking upright and formed communities. Logically due to our upright nature and less defensive capabilities developed strong communities ties leading to communal morality and ethics. I'm agreeing that evolution contributed to communal morality.

OK

6. See 4 about my references for God.

What are you referring to?

7. I am not implying "mormonism is on the forefront of women rights". I was substituting a different point to replace women's rights. Since forefront is subjective, and our levels of justification differ, I was eliminating it from the list.

Mormonism is out the window, right after the indoor plumbing stuff. What religious movement(s) were early adopters of women's rights?

8.The comment on Christianity was more of a needle to your apparent psychological aversion to Christianity and keep the religion discussion on a broader basis than one religion.

What is a psychological aversion?