What Does Being An Atheist Actually Entail? (Theism in mind)

[Darkstar]

1. Internet, computers, etc = evidence of science working.  Our knowledge and utilization of science on this earth has been successful.  Why do you assume that knowledge of the most complex phenomenon will ever be discovered.  Human kind, by your belief, will surely die off before that point.  Science is no where close to making sense of the origin of the cosmos.

2.  "Why put faith in the biased assertions of scientists over the biased assertions of theism.  (I say theism because the teachings/representation of a religion is not always what that religion was originally founded upon)."

Sorry for the bad writing... I didn't mean to convey that scientists were "biased" in my statement (although I have before).
I mean "biased" as in they already have their mind set of what they believe.  Their intentions are biased by trying to prove science creation, meaning they don't entertain the concept of a god in the first place.  When I say, "the biased assertions of theism", I mean the founding fathers of the religion (eg. Jesus and followers, Muhammad, Hindu founders).  It was a comparison of the different bias, illustrating that there is also the same ignorance in the scientific community.  (Note: not ignorance of their pursuit to tangible knowledge, but ignorance in bias.)

What does that even mean, "Science Creation"? Are you just trying to bash explanations other than goddidit?

How can you claim that scientists "don't entertain the concept of a god" as though this demonstrates that they are biased? Did Isaac Newton entertain the concept of special relativity? No. Why not? Was it because he was biased against the idea, or because the evidence available to him at the time didn't indicate any such thing? We now know about special relativity, but we still haven't found any scientific evidence for a god. If any gods exist, we should expect to find them eventually, even if we aren't specifically looking for them (Yahweh is omnipresent for crying out loud). But if no gods exist, no level of rhetoric will be able to salvage them in the end.

Do you think that Newton had faith in a pre-conceived and deeply held personal belief that the force of gravity causes an acceleration at 9.81 meters per second? Of course not, that would be ridiculous. He went where the evidence led him. The claim that scientists only seek to confirm their pre-conceived worldviews is beyond absurd. That is, in fact, the very antithesis of scientific thinking. Even if this were somehow true, you would then have to go a step further and claim that almost all scientists were in on the conspiracy together, since, for example, 97% of scientists accept climate change as real, and over 99% accept evolution.