But There is No Evidence of God's Existence

Person A: See you at church tomorrow.

Person B: I don't think so.

A: Oh, you have something else planned?

B: No, not really.

A: Why?

B: I don't see any reason to go.

A:  Yeah, but you've been going to church there for twenty years.

B: Yeah, I know, but look at it. I mean, really, there are hypocrites there. I don't see any difference between churchgoers and those who don't go. Do you see any difference?

A: Well, uh. We've had a lot of good times there, and you have friends there.

B: You know they're so full of rules; I don't want to hear them anymore. It just keeps me from enjoying it, well, you know. Do you have a good time in church? Besides, why do you believe in God? I mean, there is just no proof- I mean none. I bet you don't know who made God.

A: I still think it is a good thing.

B Seriously, man, look at all the evil in the world. Think about all the hatred and evil in the history of the church. Besides, there is just no proof. None. Can you give me proof? It's the same as believing in the Easter Bunny. Don't you agree? Seriously, at least with the Easter bunny, we got candy. But God.

A: There's evil everywhere. You can't blame God.

B: We don't need God. We're just pieces of meat with a brain. When we die, we die, so I want to have a good time while I'm still here. Besides, what has God ever done? Certainly, we don't need God for the world. 

A: How do you think you got here? Look around. How do you think this happened?

B: Things pop into existence. There's this book, "Universe From Nothing"; you should read it. You know, who needs Jesus when a star died for you? Hey, I'm happy for you, but I don't want anyone. I mean, leave me alone.  Besides, life probably came about by aliens.

A: Do you really believe that?

B: Of course I do. The famous scientist Richard Dawkins believes this.

The above is an imaginary conversation but a collection of statements I've heard through social media. How should person B  respond? The purpose of this site is to prepare people to respond in uncomfortable conversations, have understanding evidence for God and recognize logical fallacies. 

Why? It's a combination of reasons, including the influence of their professors, peer pressure, believing there is no evidence for God's existence, and inability to think for themselves. The professors are considered very intelligent, trustworthy and hold authority over the students.  Students are no longer at home and enjoy the freedom to hear different ideas for the first time. That's great if they understand Christianity and know how to respond and think logically.  This is the reason for this web site.

Some agnostic or atheist professors use multiple methods of deconverting their students. Professor Peter Boghossian, an agnostic professor, is excellent at manipulating other people's beliefs about God and other topics with a heavy dose of logical fallacies. His use of fallacies in criticizing Christianity made him very popular amongst students unfamiliar with his style.  He was pretty popular when he just criticized religion, but in 2017, he wrote an article, "The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct." The article blamed the penis for climate control issues (seriously, I can't make this stuff up). He is so good with fallacious arguments that he was published in  Cogent Social Sciences on May 19th, 2017. There was no problem until he announced it was a hoax. Then, the popular professor was not so popular. After he admitted the hoax, his teaching responsibilities were diminished, and eventually, he and the school separated. You must admit he is excellent at manipulating people's beliefs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=Pzd1EHvs9ig

Interestingly, in his book "A Manual for Creating Atheists" and in his lectures, he uses numerous logical fallacies (errors in logic)  in criticizing religion. We live in a world where all is fair in love and Christian criticism. I watched a video of him in front of students, using one logical fallacy after another and seeing the students listening intently with heads moving like bobbleheads. Bobbleheads who could not find errors in what they were being told and were unable to defend their beliefs.

This website hopes that people will be able to examine arguments against religion and make up their own minds.

Another professor who is excellent at manipulating is Richard Dawkins. He is a well-known atheist who makes a lot of money ridiculing and mocking religion, with an emphasis on Christians. His latest book, "Outgrowing God," is directed at a younger generation by insultingly suggesting they are grown up and can walk away from superstitions and myths. He proudly proclaims there is no evidence for God. So, isn't it great that professors base their lives on strict logic and science? Not exactly.

I must give Dawkins a lot of credit: his imagination saves the day when his science questions cannot be answered. Scientists now understand that creating single-cell life in 13 billion years is unreasonable. 

Since mud, crystals, electricity, and gases can't give the answers, you can count on space aliens! Yes, extraterrestrials. With his great scientific mind, Richard Dawkins, the professor of the extraterrestrial detective (PET Detective), has lots of scientific research, complex mathematical equations, hard drives filled with data, and personal experiences. Well, of course, he does; after all, he is a leading, brilliant scientist who is very knowledgeable of the scientific method and teaches in a highly respected academic institution. Not exactly.

You see, the PET Detedtive stakes his career on ET. Unlike the movie, you can't see them because they live too far from us. Please don't be afraid; they live so far away: they can't live long enough to travel such a great distance. You may wonder how these aliens came about, but this is easy: evolution. That must be the answer since evolution is science. Thank goodness for science; how else could we know anything? 

I would never question science, but just out of curiosity, how did these fascinating ETs come about? No problem: evolution. I hate to be a science denier, but if the universe hasn't existed long enough to form a single-cell organism, how did ET get such a head start on us? No problem, evolution! They went through the slow, unplanned, disorganized, blind process much faster than us. They are so much more intelligent than us that they started life on our planet. Not exactly.

Just about everyone has a blindsight bias to some extent, but some border on bizarre. 

 Bias means to be partial, prejudicial, or unfair. Biases certainly affect a person's judgment and reasoning. PET Dective has severe blind spot bias. Below, he and Peter Bohossion proudly discuss how blind they are.

Boghossian: "What would it take for you to believe in God?"

Dawkins: "I used to say it would be straightforward. It would be the Second Coming of Jesus or a big, deep, booming, bass voice saying, "I am God." But I was persuaded, mostly by Steve Zara, a regular contributor to my website. He more or less persuaded me that even if I heard this booming voice in the Second Coming with clouds of glory, the probable explanation is that it was a hallucination or a conjuring trick by David Copperfield.   He made the point that a supernatural explanation for anything is incoherent. It doesn't add up to an explanation for anything. A non-supernatural Second Coming could be aliens from outer space." Bogohhian asks, "So that [stars aligned into a message] couldn't be enough. So what would persuade you?

PET Detective: "Well, I'm starting to think nothing would, which, in a way, goes against the grain because I've always paid lip service to the view that a scientist should change his mind when evidence is forthcoming." 

Video

Although Dawkins believes there is no evidence for God, there is much more evidence for God's existence. This website presents the evidence and logic for God's existence and to defend your beliefs. 

This site covers the Kalam, Leibniz, and Teleological arguments. It also provides evidence for the resurrection. These arguments follow the rules of logic and have been acceptable for hundreds of years. I don't believe Dawkins has any such arguments for brilliant aliens.

So, how well does our PET Detective understand logic and logical fallacies? In the video, he accuses Ben Stein of "begging the question." Is that an accurate statement or claim? No, it's not true; Ben Stein asked a question," and asking a question is not begging the question. "Begging the question"is the name of the logical fallacy in which a premise is also in the conclusion. The professor thinks he understands what it means but is entirely wrong. An example of begging the question is: I know God does not exist; therefore, God doesn't exist. 

Another issue with those pesky aliens is an infinite regression. RD knows the beginning of life in just a few billion years, which is pretty far-fetched. No problem, aliens came to save the day. However, a problem with this reasoning is who designed the aliens that designed us? Since intelligent life can only occur through a slow evolutionary process, the aliens who evolved through a slow evolutionary process had to be created through aliens who evolved through a slow evolutionary process. This is an example of an infinite regression fallacy. Oops

Biases and fallacious arguments interfere with everyone's reasoning. Unless someone can recognize them, they will be deceived. The purpose of this website is to teach biases and learn to spot fallacious arguments. To understand fallacious arguments, read the quick and simplified explanation on this site's logic and reasoning page.