Add new comment

I'm not stating the likelihood of Theism and a FSM to be roughly equal, and I didn't do that anywhere in my posts.
You are equating things that have varying degrees of absurdness to each other. Everyone agrees the FSM isn't real, 99.5% of people don't believe in fairies, maybe 93% of people don't believe in Atlantis, we could say that maybe 88% of people don't believe vampires exist, etc. You could slide it all the way down to the loch ness monster, maybe coming in around 50% (I have no idea). The point is, what's absurd to you or me isn't universal. Which is why a system like "If you make a claim, you show the proof" should be automatic.
600 years ago, the idea that there was no God(s) was patently absurd. The more science has uncovered about the world, the more people are abandoning Theistic views. If we were having this discussion 600 years ago, you wouldn't have to show proof of your claim. It was "obvious". In 2014, when you make a claim and wish to have it scientifically accepted, you have to explain why. Times have ch ch changed.
............
Using the argument that many top scientists are also Theists doesn't cut it, and you should know that. Many top scientists (in terms of pure volume) also think evolution is a lie. Comparatively it's like 98/2, but there are tens of thousands of people with scientist attached to their name that don't believe we share a common ancestor with other primates. So what. Albert Einstein said some things regarding the apparent fine tuning of the universe 70 or 80 years ago. So what. Isaac Newton, whom many believe to be the smartest man to ever live, believed in Alchemy his entire life. So what. The point is that just because someone of high esteem said things, or that 95% of the worlds population believes in God (which I would challenge) doesn't mean that their opinions are true, or even likely. It is the quality of their evidence that makes or breaks a theory.
If I pulled a random religiously affiliated person off the street and asked for the best arguments for Theism, do you think you'd be impressed with their answer. Think about that for a minute. I read recently that 25% of Americans polled thought the Earth was the center of the universe or something equally embarrassing. Nearly 50% (a majority of the 3 options given!!!) of people in this country believe God created the world and humans within the last 10,000 years. Using populist arguments doesn't cut it.
93% of the National Academy of Sciences members, one of the top scientific organizations in the country are Atheist. What does that prove?
..............
And for the record, I do know the best arguments in support of God. I've seen a lot of William Lane Craig, Dinesh D' Zousa, etc. I know the arguments very well. I'm not sure this debate is headed for a rehash of those arguments, but I'm not opposed. Rather I think this debate, from my perspective, is to clear up this misconception of the "burden of proof" argument. Which I feel I've done.