your not really an atheist, you are agnostic, it really doesn't change much though, what's your response

[Farina9529]

You sorta blew it with "If you can't disprove Amelia using science, you cannot be an atheist using science either, as some of you may be."

[nobloodynamesleft]

There is no 100% in science. Science cannot disprove your theory about Amelia, but we can prove it is very, very unlikely because there is no evidence for it. Science cannot disprove God, IE a negative, like it cant disprove pink unicorns, flying rat monkeys and superman. However, given the lack of evidence for pink unicorns, we can prove it is very very unlikely it exists, like it is very unlikely God exists, because there is no evidence. But we pragmatically work on these 'percentages all the time'. Science is not 100% certain that certain drugs can treat ailments, but the evidence says it is very very likely. And we accept these odds when we go to the doctor and use such medical science, yet we are not 100% it is right.

[martatim6661008]

first off..its not the job of science to disprove god. you're the one making the claim of god so its you're job to prove it. but im sure you knew that seeing how much you know about science.second...i do not believe in the existence of any god or gods. that makes me an atheist.

[magley64magzifyascoff1515]

hi Jess...this isn't a question, but as an atheist, i feel i should respond...you didn't use science to conclude that about Amelia Earhart, you pulled that conjecture out of your butt....and rightfully, i doubt it until you can prove it...it isn't my job to disprove you, it's your job to prove any claims you make...being atheist doesn't mean that i have proof for everything, it just means things that are unproven, are not typically believed, especially not with the fervor and conviction that many Christians believe...

[jamesh]

Statistically it pretty much unlikely that Amelia Earhart is where you claim her to be. While yes it cannot be 100% proved otherwise, it is such a slim chance then it most probably not true. I'm not going to believe there's a teapot floating around the sun which I cant see just because there is a slim chance in impossilbe that it is there.So while yes, Science can take us the majority of the way, (at the moment) and it cannot give a 100% fact that God doesnt exist, lets face it, its pretty damn unlikely and I certainly dont need the extra 1% of proof to jump to the opposite conclusion that Christians jump to to fill the 99% of uncertainty which they fill with delerium and a book which has been rewritten and bastardised so many times and reinterpreted by countless generations....

[8M]

Atheism = lack of belief in deities = my default position at birth. If you want me to accept theistic beliefs, I need to see evidence. I don't see a need to justify my default position to those who want me to accept their beliefs as my own. The burden of proof is on the ones making the claim, not the one disbelieving the claim.Edit: I'm not disputing your agnostic claim though. I consider myself an agnostic as regards to the general idea of a god, but I'm certainly a strong atheist in my position concerning the existence of the gods of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism etc. That's whole another debate.

[Kitty8945]

you can be an atheist by praying to Zues and Jesus, When nothing happends. You can assume there is no god. Or you can just pray to the thousands of gods out there and just wait and see wich one answers your prayer.

[MetalDog]

You are missing the fundamental flaw in your argument. Your opening statement says, "Using science, I believe...."If you are using science, then you would need to present some sort of rationally objective, empirical and verifiable data to support your assertion. In other words, it's not just a belief...you would actually need to have some sort of testable data and evidence by which you have reached your conclusion. Since you have not done so, you have have not "used science" at all.Further, I have yet to run into an atheist who states he or she "uses science" to disprove the existence of any god or deity. An atheist is an atheist because he/she has no foundation for belief...he/she has never interpreted any event/experience/phenomenon as only being possible or true because of the existence of some god or deity. It's that simple.You might be confusing people who use logic to support their position as people "using science"; however, they are not the same thing.