If I were an Atheist

[Drew_2013]

Atheists claim there is no evidence and then contort themselves attempting to explain away facts (evidence) in favor of theism.

If you regard "the universe and people exist" as a "fact in favor of theism" then I can understand why you feel the way you do.  However, neither of those is a fact in favor of anything.  They simply demonstrate that the universe and people exist, not how either got here.  Claiming its the result of a creator because it looks created is both circular and not compelling at all, since few things in the universe "appear created" except through the credulous eyes of the theist.  I don't use the fact of existence as evidence of the lack of a god.  The fact that we lack any evidence of god is sufficient.  If you have something more than emotional or circular beliefs, you are welcome to present them.  The forum does not lack for attempts to prove any of at least a few different gods or versions of god.  The inability to produce one is not due to a lack of effort, at least.

The "looks designed" and "fine tuning" arguments aren't poor because I want them to be poor.  They're poor because they rely either on emotion or on flawed reasoning to work.  The fine-tuning argument is particularly weak, as it assumes a great many things that we either do not or cannot know, and it also assumes that god is somehow restricted in his capabilities, which seems odd if we are to assume that he created reality itself.  I find that, like most theistic arguments, those are used because they're the best of a poor set of options.  Since god has inexplicably decided to disappear and leave humanity with, at best, an ambiguous set of instructions and a universe that is remarkably self-sufficient, it's pretty confounding to try and determine who he is and where he went.  Until he decides to show up again, I am content to live as if he was never there in the first place.

If you regard "the universe and people exist" as a "fact in favor of theism" then I can understand why you feel the way you do.

Of course I do. Its the reason we're having this discussion. Lets put it another way. In order for theism to be possibly true (the belief the universe and sentient life were intentionally caused by a Creator) certain conditions must be true or there would be no reason to suggest a Creator is involved. In contrast, there isn't one fact that needs to be true for atheism to be true (the belief (or lack of belief) no Creator exists or was involved in the existence of the universe or sentient humans). In fact there are conditions that if true would significantly favor atheism. For example suppose no universe or humans existed. Not only would atheism be a slam dunk position, there would be nothing existing to attribute to a creator. The claim there is no evidence in favor of theism would actually be true if that were so . Suppose a universe did exist, but it was utterly chaotic with no laws of physics no rhyme or reason and obviously no life (exactly what one would expect to be the result of mindless mechanistic forces that some how came into existence). Again there would be no reason to raise the question of theism (or anyone to raise such an idea but this is a thought experiment). Again in order for the possibility of theism to be raised certain conditions and facts must be true.

1. A universe has to exist
2. The universe must be such that life can occur and be around long enough for sentience to occur
3. Sentient life must exist
4. There must be stable laws of physics that allow for stars, galaxies, and planets to exist.

Question: Why would mindless mechanistic forces create the conditions necessary for the claim of theism to have any merit?

You say these facts aren't compelling. Anyone who is an atheist and either disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God is going to say that. Is any atheist here or anywhere going to say the aforementioned facts are compelling but I don't give it any credence anyway? Actually there was an atheist who did give these arguments a lot of credence but as a result he became a philosophical theist. I'm referring to Antony Flew.