Why are the religious so sensitive?

[allan175]

If the existance of photons can't be proven then why would you expect it to be possible to prove anything else? Scientists don't seek to prove things in their line of work. They know it's impossible. All they can do is to do enough experiments and make enough observations to provide convincing support and verification of their theories and discoveries. But proof is something they can only aim for but never actually accomlish. All they can do is get closer and closer to the ever elusive "truth."

That's where your reasoning falls down (in my opinion), you are saying that scientists can make observations and keep refining their "theories" which is exactly why the argument for (a) god fails. Scientists *can* refine their theories (or throw them away if the evidence indicates that is what is required). There are countless examples of that happening.
God(s) have now moved to somewhere "beyond nature" by theists trying to fit their chosen god into the universe to try to keep their beliefs valid.

The concept of God was put forth as a real attempt to explain the world around us. We observe life, nature and the universe and when scientists learn more about it they always reveal something more fantasic and see more wonder in nature itself. We are told stories of men and fantastic things which have been passed down for thousands of years by very holy men. If it was passed down by your average Joe then there'd be reason to suspect its validity. Biblical archaeologists make discoveries which verify things in the Bible. Some physicists see the handy work in God in nature and that only contributes to their faith. This has never happened with unicorns to my knowledge.

I think you'll find that "very holy men" are in fact just "men"! And, as for "Biblical archaeologists make discoveries which verify things in the Bible.", a book written by men influenced by what was happening/had happend around them doesn't actually sound that significant!

I just don't think that your analogy is a valid one though. There is simply no reason whatsoever to believe that unicorns are exist. Nobody has ever seriously suggested that they have ever existed. Nobody has ever seriouls claimed to see one. People who were clean, sober and sane who have claimed to have seen unicorms have ever been taken seriously. Universities have never given PhDs in unicorn theory. What are the chances of a president who believes in unicorns ever getting elected? No physicist has ever taken unicorn theory seriously. There are no cultures which have claimed that their ancestors rode unicorns or whose stories have been passed down by the tribal priests. Stories of unicorns have not survived several millenia. Three billion people don't exist today who believe that unicorns exist. The stories of unicorns have never been substantiated by unicorn archaeologists. Nobody has ever been given a reason to suspect that unicorns exist. The existance of unicorns would never explain anything. The existance of unicorns would never have an impact on our lives.

I *think* the concept of unicorns is most likely a mis-description of rhinos. Lots of examples of strange "beasts" that have been poorly described and passed on (getting stranger & stranger).

By this I mean to say that the existance of unicorns is not on the same level of seriousness as the existance of God. If you think it wise for a theist to keep an open mind to the non-existance of God then why is it so silly to think it wise for an atheist to keep an open mind on the existance of God? Some do. They're called agnostics.

In my (atheist) mind they are exactly as serious as each other. You, as a theist, see an unprovable god as somehow different to an unprovable unicorn (dragon, elf etc).

Let me ask you this - Are you open minded to the existance of tachyons? Do you believe that keeping an open mind to the existance of tachyons would be as silly as keeping an open mind to the existance of unicorns?

Again, you seem to be connecting two completely unrelated states of "belief"! If tachyons exist at all then they will probably eventually be proved. However http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyon says "no experimental evidence for or against the existence of tachyon particles has been found" so they may well just be the product of a formula derived from a mistaken theory.