Most people at one time felt the world was flat, it’s not observable, while on the planet’s surface(without a better understanding of the physics of light and gravity that was not common or did not exist at all during this time), that it is a sphere. There-for those who postulated that it was a sphere, had to circumnavigate it before they could start truely reffering to thier theory of a sphereical planet as fact.

Also to be remember when considering this, evidence, even “hard” evidence only brings something to the state of theory if it can be tested and observed. Even then the theory can only be made a scientific law if constant, multi-party, testing and observation, over long periods of time can not provide any solid contestabilitiy to it. Further, if something is made into a scientific law it only stands as such within the paremeters set, such as the laws of gravity are relatively constant, however in quantum and astro physics there are conditions we have observed that seem to skew these, thus creating additional theories to be considered when understanding these laws.

Only when someone can provide evidence of an intellgent, omnipresent, omniscient, ceator being that is observable and testable, is it to be considered even a theory. At that point, I shall give all other things their relative considerations.

Also, keep in mind, people are people. For every scientist that has lied or over-blown their claims for greed there is also someone using religion to obtain greed-driven goals. For every militant otherist without concise rational, there exists a similarist equally as stereotypified.

Most people at one time felt the world was flat, it’s not observable, while on the planet’s surface(without a better understanding of the physics of light and gravity that was not common or did not exist at all during this time), that it is a sphere. There-for those who postulated that it was a sphere, had to circumnavigate it before they could start truely reffering to thier theory of a sphereical planet as fact.

Also to be remember when considering this, evidence, even “hard” evidence only brings something to the state of theory if it can be tested and observed. Even then the theory can only be made a scientific law if constant, multi-party, testing and observation, over long periods of time can not provide any solid contestabilitiy to it. Further, if something is made into a scientific law it only stands as such within the paremeters set, such as the laws of gravity are relatively constant, however in quantum and astro physics there are conditions we have observed that seem to skew these, thus creating additional theories to be considered when understanding these laws.

Only when someone can provide evidence of an intellgent, omnipresent, omniscient, ceator being that is observable and testable, is it to be considered even a theory. At that point, I shall give all other things their relative considerations.

Also, keep in mind, people are people. For every scientist that has lied or over-blown their claims for greed there is also someone using religion to obtain greed-driven goals. For every militant otherist without concise rational, there exists a similarist equally as stereotypified.

Ok back to reality land.. I’m an atheist and I claim there is no god anywhere. How can I claim such things ?

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT -ANY- GOD EXIST.

There, that was easy.

Ok back to reality land.. I’m an atheist and I claim there is no god anywhere. How can I claim such things ?

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT -ANY- GOD EXIST.

There, that was easy.

he starts out by denying that atheism is just as much a belief there is NO god as theism is the belief there IS one, and ends his muddled tirade with saying, i believe there is no god, i don’t have the knowledge.

hahahah! and he even says, it’s “subjective knowledge,” which he refuted three minutes earlier.

i “believe” he’s a douchebag…

he starts out by denying that atheism is just as much a belief there is NO god as theism is the belief there IS one, and ends his muddled tirade with saying, i believe there is no god, i don’t have the knowledge.

hahahah! and he even says, it’s “subjective knowledge,” which he refuted three minutes earlier.

i “believe” he’s a douchebag…