Resolved: The most logical position for belief is Agnostism

Okay. I shall show some arguments that show that a deity is not necessary to create everything, and that even if there is a deity, it is unlikely that it is the Catholic god. 1. Evolution. Evolution allows for organisms, once life forms, to evolve into complex beings capable of contemplating their own existence. Through natural selection, superior genes survive more and flourish, while poor genes (except for recessive) die out, or do not remain prevalent in a population. Gradually, beings with more brainpower become a higher percent of the population, and the intelligence of a population increases. So god is unnecessary to cause the creation of intelligent beings once certain proteins begin to form. 2. Logical inconsistencies within the idea of a Catholic god. The idea of a god that is all knowing, omnipotent, omnipresent, omnibenevolent, with a master plan that supports free will has many logical inconsistencies. A. All knowing. To claim this is irrational, because there could always be something that you don't know that you don't know. In other words, you are unaware there is knowledge you don't have. Even if you did have all knowledge it would still be an irrational claim, because any intelligent being would be aware of the ability for there to be something that he did not know. B. The master plan and free will. How can a being possibly have both a master plan and let things have free will? Would he respect someone's free will to break his plan? Is he okay with that? And how does he support free will? He spent a large portion of the old testament ordering people around? And for that matter, how is he all good if his master plan requires people to go to hell? Or millions of innocents to die horribly and painfully? How is that a good plan? C. Omnibenevolent and omnipotent. If there were someone who had a portal gun, and was in the time of the early rise of Hitler, and could have teleported him and any other important people in the Nazi party to Siberia to live there and not really cause harm to anyone, that person would be reprehensible for not doing so. So if god has the ability to stop any and all evil, or at least things like earthquakes and tornadoes that kill without free will being involved, then isn't that not "all good"? Or does might make right? These logical inconsistencies make the Catholic idea of god especially unlikely. 3. Science and proof Basically, to prove things, you must have evidence for them. The positive assertion, that there is a god, or that there isn't must be proven. Unless the idea of god can be proven or disproven, then agnosticism is the logical position to take on the stance of god. We cannot know whether god doesn't exist, because it is an unfalsifiable hypothesis. However, the idea of god must be proven. It is not true simply because the negative cannot be proven. 4. Other faiths So, even if there was a god. OR at least the possibility of one, humans have worshiped a great many gods. Judaism isn't even this worlds oldest religion, and for almost the entirety of history, the entire eastern segment of our world remained untouched by Christianity, and Native Americans had never heard of Jesus until white people came. So, even if it were likely that there was a god, the probability that it is your god is very unlikely.