Proving Atheism Is True

[solja247]

So what evidence do you have for the existence of your god?

Evidence of design in the universe is not conclusive because there are valid alternative explanations.

Correct, its not conclusive. I may be refuted later on. However, we are only going deeper into the rabbit hole when it comes to the universe, so I doubt it.
Even a cell appears to designed, the more we learn about it, the more complicated it gets.
As I have said, it depends on your philosphical baggage to what you conclude (or dont conclude).

One that springs to mind(and a personal favorite)is that our universe is just one of many popping up through the cosmos like so many bubbles in a glass of beer. And the constants for each slightly different.

Just because other univeres most likely exisit. Doesnt mean that anything is possible. Is there a world where there is magic? Another with the force?

This of course is pure theory, since we have no way of verifying it. But it is still much more plausible than the universe being created by some childishly petulant half witted fool with the design skills of a

crack addicted ferret.

If God did create this universe, it is nothing but a master art. Are you a Physicist or a Cosmologist? Even they look at the universe in awe and wonder.

As far as your made-up conversation goes... I find it a little ironic that you're painting atheists with a broad, childlike brush while you diddle around any pertinent questions posed to you. "You" don't even answer "yourself" with any sort of reason.

As I have said before, it depends on what you believe. Some Atheists see it as being completely rational to believe in the supernatural, just no God or gods. (Most) Atheists dont adress the question, they use sacarsm or straw men to rationalise their arguement (atempt) and thus, completely reject the idea that (some) theists are completely rational.

Faith is faith, period. You can add blind, half-blind, color-blind, and whatever other preface you want to it - it doesn't change the meaning. Faith is belief that is not based on evidence or reason. There is no scientific evidence for a god (if you've found some I'm sure lots of people would LOVE to hear about this) so your belief in one, or thirteen, does have a faith-based element. Denial of that would definitely be irrational.

Well thats where you are wrong. I have evidence first, then faith comes. I have evidence for God most likely existing and evidence for the life of Jesus and resurrection (I will bring the evidence forward latter, I need to do more research)

If someone could prove to me, through evidence and logic that Jesus didnt rise from the dead, I wouldnt be a Christian, I would be a Deist.
If Someone could prove to me that God probablly doesnt exisit, I would be Agnostic. (It is much easier to make someone doubt than bring evidence to the table)

Probably, but I'll give God the benefit of the doubt on that one.

Heard of climate change? All that is that we have shifted the equilibrium (slightly) and we may destroy our world. Our World is at a very very intricate equilibrium.

I can't see what benefit there is to volcanoes, though. Any suggestions? As for refuting the fine tuning argument, I said that there's nothing objectively special about life. Why pick that phenomenon out as the purpose of the universe?

Volcanoes?
http://www.universetoday.com/32576/benef...volcanoes/
I am sure there are many other benefits, perhaps you should do a little research?

Forget about life! Fine tuning arguement is everything! From the elements on the periodic table, to the construction of planets and stars. If th Big bang was a tiny bit bigger or smaller no life, stars, planets, elements would exisit. It has be pretty much perfect. (Francis Collins makes a great case in his book, 'The language of God.'