Systematically Dismantling Atheism

[Jenny A]

I'm sorry to jump right in when we haven't been introduced.

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.

Hardly. I suggest you check a dictionary.

A person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/def...sh/atheist

Agnostics are atheists because they lack a belief in god. I personally disbelieve in all the gods invented by man. Any god at all I just find extremely unlikely.

The Incremental Intelligence Theorem

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

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

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

Sure there might be sentient life elsewhere. Check.

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.

Um, no. We just from possibility to existence. You missed a crucial step here.

So then we must assume life form 1.1 could exist, 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. 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.

Ah, back to possibilities. Actually, the possibility of something 1% greater does not lead to an infinite string of larger larger possibilities. For example, there are physical limits on mammals living out of the water with regard to load bearing weight, consumption of food, and blood pressure constraints which elephants and giraffes push the boundaries of. Brains require an enormous about of energy, produce heat, and create problems in the birth canal. Life forms else where may have different physical constraints, but constraints there will be. Infinite intelligence is therefore not possible in a life form.

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

I'd like to see how you calculated the possibility of god. Humans or any multi-celled animal are much less likely than single celled animals. God, would be off the scale. If a god were as likely as single celled animals, we'd be hip deep in gods.

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.

emphasis mine.

Nonsense. Just a quick survey of the life we know shows increased intelligence is quite unlikely. There are very few animals approaching human intelligence, but a number of animals are sentient, depending on how you define sentient..

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.

Just covered that, see above.

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. 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

I just explained why infinite intelligence is unlikely.

Therefore true atheism (not agnosticism) is an illogical concept

Back to "true atheism." What you define as true atheism is gnostic atheism. Few atheists are gnostic.