Re: Atheism Intelligence Correlations - The Strongest Argument for Ath
[ QUOTE ]
I haven't seen any arguments based on modern empirical science in this thread that tend to disprove the existence of God.
[/ QUOTE ]
Every popular definition of God has been refuted by science.
[ QUOTE ]
Instead, interestingly, DS cited two facts of modern science (the photon/slit experiment) and our lack of ability to produce computers with conciousness) as evidence that God may exist.
[/ QUOTE ]
As far as I'm concerned, David is an atheist, even if he refuses to call himself one. He acknowledges the possibility of a non omnipotent creator, as do I. But that's more because of the simulation argument than being religious. In other words, if science progresses to the point where we can create universes, that does not make us Gods. We are still mortals.
Furthermore, citing two of the only scientific uncertainties out there as reason to believe in God is completely unfair. Going by past data, it's reasonable to assume we will figure those out within the next 15 years, and more importantly, the burden of proof is obviously on the theists.
|