'Atheist' nations more peaceful, Global Peace Index study finds.

[Autumnlicious]

I would be happy to expand.

The fallacy is this; We both agree that the Bible is not the literal divine word of god, nor is it a scientifically accurate document. But we take different assumptions from that fact. I think that they have mis-characterized the supreme being, that they are incorrect about god (although that incorrectness is an opinion, not a fact). You guys have come to the conclusion that because the bible is not the word of god, there is no god. So while I am saying that the Fundamentalist literal creationists are wrong about god, you are saying that they are right. In the sense that only discounting one version of god does not an atheist make. There are a lot of ideas about god, and I tried to disprove them all as an atheist years ago, and failed. It is not possible to disprove 6,000,000,000 versions of an idea.

The fallacy lies in the fact that we both think the creationists are wrong. I think they are wrong, so I keep looking for something that is right. You think they are wrong, so there is no god. That means that in as much as they are wrong, they are right, because after disproving them the battle is over.

Make sense?

Not in the slightest. You see - there is this book here, with the inherent properties of a book. Statistically, I am going to find out it is roughly box shaped with a varying thickness in a defined range based on theoretical text-to-page density correlated with the limits of the human eye to find an upper bound. Chances are it is meant to be read, and chances are it was written by at least 1 individual.

To say that the Bible is the word of God is, for lack of a better term, applying the ownership of an infinite being outside of time, living in the past, future and present, who displays the most conflicting character traits, is statistically unlikely. Doesn't make it untrue, but it does make the "truth" stated by theists questionable.

Also, you attempt argumentum ad populum, thinking that "6,000,000,000" (where'd you get that number - out of your ass?) variations on an idea makes it correct. And let me prove why your argument fails with a test case: Extrapolating from [1] the Population Reference Bureau with an estimated 106,456,367,669 people ever born, and assuming that 50% of them ever made it past infancy, and also assuming that at one point, most people had an idea of the world being flat at some point in their life, leaving 5.32281838 × 10^10 similar ideas of the world being flat, opposed to your ass-picked number of 6×10^9. Obviously, the world must be flat (sarcasm)!

You may argue that, from a very limited perspective due to the relative size of the Earth compared to a human being, the Earth /is/ flat, but that assertion breaks down after you travel a short distance of several dozen miles, with a very slight, nigh unnoticeable, curvature occurring.

Since you assert the positive that there must be a God or some other supreme being, outside of what we normally see, the burden of proof is on you.