Honest Question to Atheists - Best Argument?

[robvalue]

If I had to pick an argument which is the nearest thing to convincing, I'd go with the fine tuning argument. It's about 0.01% convincing, whereas every other argument I've ever heard is firmly at 0%.

Rob, even that one is complete and utter bullshit IMHO..

Think of it like the puddle story...
How can the water fit perfectly in this hole ... It must've been made for it!

If you reverse engineer the fine tuning argument, it's the same thing.

2 Scenarios:

1) squillions of big bangs have been going off for an eternity, but because "things" (new universal laws) weren't tuned, they fizzed out quickly.
(Except the one that was tuned properly) That's us. Only us.

2) All physical universes can only ever develop one set of laws ...It's in the dna of every quark!
The universe uses fractal logic as a normal phenomenon. It's everywhere. Trees. Galaxies, etc
We will find some patterns naturally occurring ...this is normal... Let's not become John Nash over this (A Beautiful Mind)

my 2c (less tax)

I agree, it is complete and utter bullshit, hence the very low convincing percentage I gave it a nonzero amount because it does evoke a very small kind of emotional response in me, whereas none of the others do. But I know it is an utterly irrational argument, and my emotional response means nothing. If I was an irrational person, I could kind of understand how that emotion could whisk me away.

It's just me being honest about my personal reaction to the argument.

Edit: extra bit!

Here is a problem with all religions relying on a text. Assume for a minute it was actually dictated by "a god". So what? That doesn't mean it's accurate, or of any use at all. To think otherwise is to assume that a god can't/won't dictate a load of shit. Why would you assume that? How can you possibly understand the motivations of a god? The only way to find out if it's true or useful it to analyse it ourselves.