It's too long, and I cannot focus right now on account of it being a Friday night and I have tomorrow off of work.
I always love it when people say atheists are fighting a losing battle. To me it shows that the theists aren't engaging and/or thinking about what atheism is, what arguments atheists have, and in my opinion it's a sign of defeat for the theists because it shows that they will never listen to what the other side has to say.
From what I read in the article it's same same 'complex design; complex designer' bullshit argument. Here's the quote:
After all, take the Blue Gene supercomputer that accomplishes over 200 trillion calculations per second. Japan's "K Computer" (2011), now the fastest computer in the world, can handle over 8 quadrillion calculations each second, making it 40 times faster than the Blue Gene (or the power of about a million standard desktops.) But a single human brain can handle probably 1020 (100 sextillion) instructions per second (we don't really know) – and far more human brains have concluded God exists than not. If these marvelously constructed human supercomputers required the input of immense complexity and design, how to atheists or scientists logically argue that the human mind, which is a million times faster than the best supercomputer in the world, simply appeared from nowhere out of nothing, by chance?
Non-sequitur right there. The human mind is not a computer. A computer such as a supercomputer has been designed though years and years of research. The brain has evolved through millions of years of evolution. And actually, far more human brains have believed in a god, correct - but there's a large argument within the theistic world of which god that might be. And because of this how are atheists likely to believe in one of those groups that believe in a god when there are so many groups to choose from. Atheists believe in one less god than a christian does.
The little I read in that article shows it'll just be as illogical as any other article written on the subject of atheists having a losing argument.
and this:
In essence, disbelief can be reduced to personal rebellion against God.
They've taken the generic god out of the question and replaced that god with a god that has traits. The trait being 'god will be pissed at you if you rebel against him'
And honestly, an atheist cannot rebel against that which they believe doesn't exist.
and this:
Atheists simply can't win against theism philosophically, historically, scientifically, logically or otherwise because so much evidence runs contrary to their position. There always will be such evidence, and if science continues to advance, the evidence will continue to increase which means the atheist can never win.
Actually, regarding science, history, logic and philosophically, atheists have the advantage because no theist has proven god with any of the four. And in terms of science, science isn't trying to prove or disprove god, but looking at science it's pretty easy to conclude that certain god's aren't real when using what has been found in science and comparing it with holy books.
So that article is just like many others written. It's a shame it's a poor misrepresentation of atheism.
-M
