[tame_deuces]

[ QUOTE ]
snowman -

ZJ's argument depends on belief trends, not on specific believers. So when you say...

[ QUOTE ]
The bottom line is there are very intellignet atheists, and very intelligent theists.

[/ QUOTE ]

...you're completely missing the point. The bottom line is that, among very intelligent people, atheists are wildly over-represented.

If you don't believe God's existence is a subject amenable to rational inquiry, obviously you don't believe this trend means anything...except maybe that God hates smart people.

But if you believe there is a rationally "best" response to the proposition "God exists", then this trend constitutes a strong argument that belief in God is irrational.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think a more apt description would be 'currently irrational'. We shouldn't reject what we can't know based on what a proposed 'elite' of thinkers holds as a majority view.

If we did this we would risk blocking developments in knowledge. You have some bad examples of this in science. Phlogiston theory is my favourite.