Animal wrote:Atheism is a !@#ed up philosophy and very UNscientific. Absence of Evididence does NOT mean Evididence of Absence. This is Junior Hight science, people.
Are you addressing anyone in particular? Maybe I need to review the early history of this thread, but I haven't seen anyone claiming there is evididence (sometimes also called "evidence") for the correctness of atheism. I don't see anything in the last half dozen posts or so inconsistent with what you're saying, so I'm not sure to whom you're talking.
Both are merely the last refuge of those that are too insecure with themselves to say "I don't know". This is why Woo-Woos constantly run on and on about crap that they have no clue about. They WANT to know what's going but lack the inteligence to understand the background. They therefore make stuff up which they can easily understand.
How is this different than religion OR atheism?
Well, I would say atheism is a religion.
How is it different? Well, if someone claimed there to be rock solid evidence in favor of his/her religion (including atheism when appropriate) when there is in fact no such evidence, then it wouldn't be different. Do all religious people (including atheists) do that?
To both I say, STFU, GBTW, and try to figure out how the puzzle works.
GBTW == ???