Quote:
Originally Posted by troutman
Mr. Dawkins would answer this question this way. Refer to The God Delusion.
http://richarddawkins.net/article,22...uffington-Post
The God Hypothesis is a proper scientific hypothesis whose truth or falsehood is hidden from us only by lack of evidence
We explain our existence by a combination of the anthropic principle and Darwin's principle of natural selection. That combination provides a complete and deeply satisfying explanation for everything that we see and know. Not only is the god hypothesis unnecessary. It is spectacularly unparsimonious. Not only do we need no God to explain the universe and life. God stands out in the universe as the most glaring of all superfluous sore thumbs. We cannot, of course, disprove God, just as we can't disprove Thor, fairies, leprechauns and the Flying Spaghetti Monster. But, like those other fantasies that we can't disprove, we can say that God is very very improbable. |
Not viewing this yet, I look forward to their non-faith based, scientific proof of god. Likely they will resort to the tired old irreducible complexity argument, which is not scientific, or the, you cannot disprove god's existence, which of course is not proof of god's existence.
Again they believe god exists in absolute
a priori, which is what religion is all about; Believing on faith, without evidentiary requirements.