To be honest I do not have any on hand and I take no offense for your lack of belief in my statement. If you spent time looking it up you would eventually come to the same conclusion, but at this time I have no on hand evidence that would be convincing enough to serve as proof or evidence.
And...
It might take a degree in psychology to understand how wrong this statement is. In the end, clinical psychologists would be a psychologist to make that statement and more often then not clinical psychologists do no base their ideas on evidence.
Either you do not know what the scientific method is or you are pretending that you do not know what it is. The reason why the scientific method is flawless is because it takes into account that it is not flawless. The only flawless ingredient to the scientific method is the human aspect...
It actually has a negative effect, again see link,
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
If the link is not enough information you can always search for more yourself.
Yes it will be your own, but if you are correct or not will be decided by the scientific method, not by opinion. And I think this 20 page thread should influence theists enough to realize there is no valid evidence for god or religion.
I applaud your optimism, but have to point out a couple vital flaws. First you do not take into consideration the fact that there are downs to following a religion, often relating to discrimination, hatred and death. And almost all of the religions you mentioned believe that if you do not...
Dude you are great, I love people like you because you make me smile. I can not believe no one has had your train of thought before, because if they had I would have never become an atheist. Thank you for converting me, LOL.
True, but Bouncing Ball's point is a simple one, perhaps too simple, it is true that there has to be an original mover. But that is all that is true and nothing more, so the claim that god is the original mover is even more problematic then Ball's attempt showing the error in the theist twist...
Get Firefox and you can push Ctrl + "+" and you can increase the fount size.
Incorrect, you may agree they are proof because you believe in god. However, they prove nothing, I will not bother to go step by step though them for it is meaningless. Rather I will point something out, he claims...
Your bold type makes me feel that this reasoning has to be more true then anyone else. But unfortunately like before this argument is one of two things. It is either a definition of god or an ignorant statement. In this context I will allow you to claim it is a definition of god but the rest...
Proof?
Into the ground. ( remember the only thing atheists have in common is they do not believe in God) Most atheists that I know do not believe in a spirit that posses the body so there is no where to "go" after death.
I will not debate the ignorance of the statement for there exists a level of it in the statement I made. If I was to make it again I would have stated it differently. On the other hand it has nothing to do with my understanding of the scripture, because it is just another book, even if it is...
Why are you trying to bring religion into the realm of science? Religion is about faith in something there is no evidence for, when you try to justify events with scientific concepts you only hurt your own faith.