(August 14, 2010 at 3:05 am)tackattack Wrote: Wow to that last post, I don't have huge amounts of time so I'll be brief and only address some points:
1-just because you don't accept subjective evidence, even when coorberated doesn't mean there is no evidence, it only means you see no evidence (which in all likely hood would only be materialistic in nature anyway)
2- You should only apply occam's razor when competing hypothesis are equal in other respects, it's not the case here.
3-agreed
4-atheism is simply a belief that there isn't evidence to support the existence of God/gods thusly it is the neutral position it has nothing to do with science other than the equirement for evidence (which is only by similarity)
Not quite:
1. There is no such thing as subjective evidence. Thats 'opinion' not evidence.
2 .They are equal.
3. Agreed ?? You cant agree that one if you have no evidence I dont accept your agreement as I dont accept ypou have evidence. See 1.
4. The definitionis closer to agnostic than atheist. An athiest has made up their minds usually based on the evidence. I admit some may not be intrested in evidence as such they are quite willing to accept themost parsimonious subjective explantion.
That would be there is no God.