Systematically Dismantling Atheism

[The Grand Nudger]

Let me first define true atheism

Atheism is a complete and total rejection of all theistic claims. If theists assert God (creator of the universe and all life in it) does exist, atheists must assert the contrary , i.e. God does not exist. The only middle ground in this true dichotomy is agnosticism (undecided), which is not true atheism.

-and when you're done I'll define true ignorance. Since we're in the mood to define the positions of others tonight.

A.We have observable empirical evidence of a wide range of sentient life, all with varying degrees of intelligence/attributes, existing here on earth

Yup

B.Therefore a wide range of sentient life, all with varying degrees of intelligence/attributes existing elsewhere in the universe, including other possible dimensions, is a logical possibility and can not be ruled out

Sure.

Therefore If A is true then B is logically possible and can not be rejected

Oh it can be rejected fairly easily - rejected out of hand even.

Atheists will easily accept the existence of a sentient life form (lets call it life form 1.1) that is 1% superior in intelligence to humans, and they will accept this possibility by blind faith using nothing more than logical inferences.

I need blind faith to accept some logical inference? I think that you may be mistaken. Also..."an atheist" (anyone remember the scene in fear and loathing, with the druug conference? everytime someone goes douchemode like this that's all I can think of) probably won't easily accept any horseshit you've concocted, you realize that, right?

So then we must assume life form 1.1 could exist,

Actually, since you mentioned inferences...assumption would be the wrong term to use. You're talking about people inferring aliens, not assuming them, but carry on.

therefore can not be ruled out of existence. And life form 1.1 would also logically assume the possible existence of life form 1.2., and life form 1.2 would also logically assume the possible existence of life form 1.3 etc. etc.

And at every step along the way an intelligent life form that is 1% superior in intelligence/attributes can logically & rationally exist from the perspective of the life form that is 1% inferior, and at no point along the way does this chain of slightly superior life forms become an irrational concept (i.e flying spaghetti monsters) from the perspective of the preceding slightly less intelligent life form.

Sure, we can partition life in increments of 1% or a half of .01% all day long, especially if it;s hypothetical life, eh?

Therefore in this chain of logically possible life forms, the existence of life form 100000^100000 (i.e creator of the universe, thus God) becomes as logical a concept as life form 1.1 is.

Generally speaking, when you use the word "therefore" something is following. In this case, it's not. 1.1, 2.9, A billion.1...all your line of reasoning would lead us to is incrementally more intelligent than the last (and less intelligent than the next). You've made a leap of faith - over your own argument, invoking a god for no reason whatsoever. Gratz.

The concept of a God-like intelligence is only rejected by narrow minded subjective atheists that are incapable of mentally grasping the existence of BIG LIFE, when in fact there is no rational, logical or mathematical basis to reject a God-like intelligence from existing. Just as single celled organisms and trillion celled organisms have the same mathematical chances of existing , humans and a God-like sentience also have the same mathematical chances of existing

Let's see that math then, eh?

Understand, the "SIZE OF INTELLIGENCE" has absolutely no relevance what so ever to the potential existence of a sentient life form. Therefore unimaginably small life has the exact same chances of existing as unimaginably big life does as far as logic is concerned, and the IIT proves it at every incremental step.

No it doesn't. Ask yourself what the odds would be of a new creature the size of a blue whale cropping up on this rock would be? Now weigh that against the emergence of novel forms of single celled life. There;s a reason that there are more different types of germs on this planet than there are whales (a whole host of reasons, actually).

Once the atheist opens the door of possibility to the existence of life form 1.1, he then must produce a reason to stop this incremental intelligence from reaching Godhood in a stepwise fashion. And the atheist can never produce a valid reason to stop the progression of this incremental intelligence other than he can't mentally comprehend a God-like intelligence existing. Therefore the atheist is forced to compare the concept of God to absurd concepts like flying spaghetti monsters to justify his reasoning in what should be a perfectly logical concept.

-Or-, you're fapping all over a self serving construct of what you think an atheist must do, must think, must "whatever".

Atheists illogically and irrationally put a cap on the intelligence/attribute levels of all life that can possibly exist, and do so without ever giving an explanation why a God-like intelligence can not exist or is highly unlikely to exist.

Why would I do that? I'd imagine a "godlike intelligence" would be a small feat if this cosmos were teeming with life...if the intelligence of our human gods are the bar that needs to be met. Shooting for the bare minimum on that one, it would seem.

In fact the only logical reason someone has to put a cap on the intelligence levels in the universe, is if a life form knows all that can be possibly be known, thus is all knowing and can't know any more

Therefore true atheism (not agnosticism) is an illogical concept

You keep using that word.....as before, therefore usually indicates something that follows, and here again it does not.