Atheism Provides the more Rational and Realistic Worldview than Theism

The burden of proof is on Con to show that God is likely to exist; I will refute his evidence and arguments once they are posted. The most prominent reason for my disbelief in a God is that there is no compelling evidence for one. The following arguments will elucidate why the existence of a God is unlikely (I have copy-pasted these arguments from my previous debate because I put alot of time to write them myself): Religions and God are Man-MadeAlthough the debate is centered on the existence of a deity, I would like to discuss various religions to show that their teachings are irrational and therefore the idea of a God who created it is as well. I challenge Con to express to the readers and myself which religion he holds to be true if any so that I can address his beliefs more specifically. When it comes to the truth of religions, there can be only two possibilities. Either all religions are false or one religion is true. All religions cannot possibly be true because they all conflict one another (non-conflicting religions can be true as well but I find it unlikely for anyone to argue for this proposition). If God truly wanted the world to know which religion is true then why not just come out now and show it, in a time where we can actually record miracles? Christopher Hitchens logic on miracles is quite indisputable when he stated, “What is more likely? That all natural order is suspended, or that a Jewish mink should tell a lie? ” If you do in fact believe you have witnessed a miracle please ask yourself what is more likely: that the natural order of the universe has been suspended in your favor, or that you have made a mistake? Either way it seems that God is taking great strides to hide himself from reputable scientists. God also seems to not care at all about a human consensus towards religions, theistic evidence, and even interpretations of scripture. It is what one would expect if you assume these holy texts to be man-made. All miracles, stories, and myths from holy books are indoctrinated into children at an early age. If you have Christian parents, you are most likely to be a Christian if you have Hindu parents then you are most likely to be a Hindu, and so on. It seems as though one will stick to the beliefs given to them at the very early stages of their lives and hold them faithfully until death. I do not believe one will ever find the correct path to truth in this manner. Skepticism and logical inquiry is the greatest path to truth in both science and life. Rene Descartes once said: "I know how much we are prone to err in what affects us, and also how much the Judgments made by our friends should be distrusted when these Judgments [are] in our favor. " If you want to truly know whether your religion is true, in an unbiased and genuine fashion then please apply the outsider test (. http://wiki.ironchariots.org......) to your personal religion. This test basically asks one to question their own religious evidence with the same amount of skepticism as you apply to other religions. If any rational person does this in a sincere manner, then they should find themselves at a loss to which religion to believe. Ideally, they should ultimately become skeptical of all religious beliefs and concede that scientific evidence is our best bet. Evolution trumps Intelligent Design Evolution through natural selection along with abiogenesis is the best theory with predictive power which explains how life could have begun, and how species develop over time. Intelligent design is the theory that the universe was designed by an intelligent being rather than a naturalistic process such as natural selection. In any case intelligent design cannot be considered as a scientific theory (like evolution and natural selection) because it does not meet the following criterion (. http://en.wikipedia.org......):1. Consistent2. Parsimonious (see Occam's Razor)3. Useful (describes and explains observed phenomena, and can be used in a predictive manner)4. Empirically testable and falsifiable (potentially confirmable or disprovable by experiment or observation)5. Based on multiple observations (often in the form of controlled, repeated experiments)6. Correctable and dynamic (modified in the light of observations that do not support it)7. Progressive (refines previous theories)8. Provisional or tentative (is open to experimental checking, and does not assert certainty) It is impossible for anyone to disprove the proposition that God did create the universe with intelligent design. Therefore intelligent design is unfalsifiable by principle, rendering it an untestable and unscientific theory. Furthermore, if God did create all species with intelligent design than why didn’t he make them optimal beings? It seems that God supports poor design by allowing humans to choke from the same hole we breathe with. We have too many flaws in our design to have been made by a perfect all-loving God. God Cannot be Omnipotent or Omnibenevolent in any Logical Sense The omnipotence paradox is as follows: If a being can perform any action, then it should be able to create a task which this being is unable to perform; hence, this being cannot perform all actions. Yet, on the other hand, if this being cannot create a task that it is unable to perform, then there exists something it cannot do (. http://en.wikipedia.org......). An example would be: Can God create a rock so massive that he cannot move it? If the answer is yes, then God is not all-powerful because he cannot move this rock. If the answer is no, then God is not all-powerful because he cannot create this rock. Either way it is not possible for God to be logically omnipotent, this means that an all-powerful God could not exist in a logical universe. One may argue that God transcends logic, but it is up to the theist to provide proof and evidence for such a wild assertion. God cannot be omnibenevolent (all-loving, or infinitely good) as well. To put it plainly: 1) If an all-powerful and perfectly good God exists, then evil does not exist. 2) Evil exists. 3) Therefore, an all-powerful and perfectly good God does not exist. You Must Believe This if you Believe in Evolution and God If you believe in evolution then you should agree that humans have been evolving for thousands of years. Modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens) have emerged around 200,000 years ago (. http://en.wikipedia.org......). All scientific evidence points to our evolution and to an old earth. To believe in a theistic God one must believe that for 198,000 years, humans have been living in desperate conditions. High infant mortality rates, low life expectancies, constant threat of danger from predators, barbarism, savagery, death, and suffering. For 198,000 years God watched this with indifference, and only around 2,000 years ago he decides to step in and reveal himself in the less literate part of the world. It is much more likely that all religions are equal glimpses of the untrue, as all are man-made. The Origins of the Universe is Unknown Theists are glad to announce and proclaim that God is the creator of the universe. However no person can actually provide any proof of this claim. If God is the creator of the universe then who created God? If one can claim that God had no creator and he is eternal, then one can say the universe is eternal as well. According to Occam’s razor (. http://en.wikipedia.org......'s_razor), since the universe is much simpler than a God, then the eternal Universe explanation is more likely to be true. In reality, nobody knows the true origin of the universe and therefore we must keep our possibilities open: 1) The universe and the Big Bang could have been created by completely naturalistic causes. 2) The Big Bang could have been created by uncaused causes. Uncaused causes seem to occur all the time through spontaneous quantum phenomena such as radioactive decay (. http://en.wikipedia.org......) and quantum fluctuations (. http://en.wikipedia.org......). 3) The universe could have always existed. 4) God always existed, and created the universe. Again, it is better to adopt the universe explanations as the universe is less complex then God and therefore more likely to be correct. It is up to Con to prove that (4) is more likely than all other possibilities. The following questions are easily answered if you assume there is no GodNo compelling evidence for any God has ever been presented to this day, if there was then there would be a consensus between atheists and theists. If God is omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good then why does he constantly do irrational things, things that can be easily explained if you assumed that they are man-made. There are millions of nonbelievers and people from different religions that are good and rational people. If God's doctrines truly do benefit mankind, then why doesn't God just pop up and prove his existence to all nonbelievers and believers in the wrong faith to finally progress the human condition? Why doesn't God seem to give any notable benefits to his "true" believers? Why doesn't God heal amputees? Why doesn't God stop religious wars and controversy and grant his followers their rightful peace? Why does God allow so much suffering in our world, to even starving and innocent children? Why does gratuitous evil exist? Why does God seem to spread his truth in the irrational manner of anecdotal evidence through holy books? The best and easiest answers to these questions are either that 1) God does not exist or 2) God does not care for humans (The third option is that God does care but does not have the power to intervene in human affairs. However this option must be discarded as the definition agreed upon includes an all-powerful God). Through all the arguments explained thusfar I find it much more likely that (1) is true. Since God is not likely to exist, atheism is the more rational and realistic worldview.