Omniscience Argument Against God's Existence

[Vincenzo Vinny G.]

It's good that there are atheists who are looking to work on arguments.

Speaking of which, could you take a look at another of my arguments when you get the chance? http://atheistforums.org/thread-19833.html

But your argument commits a modal error in P2. To see this, we can make a distinction between two sorts of metacognitive states:
a) Cognizant unawareness: I KNOW that I am unaware of how many atoms are in my body.
b) Non-cognizant unawareness: I DON'T KNOW that I am unaware of how many atoms are in my body.

P2 denies the possibility of (a). Although, (a) is obviously a possible stance to hold.

I guess my argument is unclear then. I intended to refer to the metacognizant state b) ('unknown unknowns').

So given
(a) your original premise (P2) You cannot be aware of that which you are [currently] unaware of, even if in principle you could one day become aware of it.
(b) any proposition F that an entity does not know
© noncognizant unawareness ('unknown unknown')

does (P2) say
P2*) "You cannot know that you don't know F"?

I know I'm asking a lot of questions, but when you make arguments like this, I find it important to be precise.