So you now agree you can not prove there is no god. Therefore science is not on the side of the atheist.
I think the greater challenge, on balance, is relating intelligence to the belief in "Intelligent Design."
Give it up, jem. You can't just pull an inherently unprovable theory out of your ass and claim it stands up to scrutiny. There is a pecking order when it comes to hypotheses and their available supporting evidence. Yours is at the back of the line. Take a number.
another illogical response. What prompts you to look at my statement to stu argue I have an unprovable theory. My statement does not presuppose any theory other than Stu and argue Science not being able to prove there is no God.
When the desire for what is not true overrides reason, intelligence is used to create fantasy. As such, the mind that makes the world is intelligent, even ingenious. It does accomplish its objectives, rather perfectly. The world is designed to deny Self, enabling dreamers to be something else entirely, utterly obscuring true genesis. As such, the genesis of the world is yet uncertain...by design. By this measure, the mind is worthy of applaud. It successfully masks the fact that YOU are the maker of the mind that designs to deny thy Self by means of "the universe". Christ!
What I agree is proven jem is, whether you like it or not , in certain respects you are atheist and it remains that you still have a lost less coherence in your unintelligent rebuttals than any "atheist wack job" I've ever heard.
main dicitonary definitions ânoun a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings. .....that's you jem boy !