Typhon

Hello,

I hope this is not old hat (this article is not exactly new, but I re-saw it mentioned on a popular blog), but has this delightful article by the much missed Douglas Adams as found here:

<a href="http://www.americanatheist.org/win98-99/T2/silverman.html" target="_blank">http://www.americanatheist.org/win98-99/T2/silverman.html</a>

...been discussed here at all? I think it's an extremely articulate, concise, insightful look into why the case for the existence of god is so very, very weak.

I found myself agreeing, that while at times I feel a need to talk about hypotheticals (like the moon being made out of cheese) when theists clamour "well, you can't be sure," I am sure, at least reasonably so.

Like Adams, I don't just not-believe in god, I'm convinced of his non-existence. It even seems silly to speculate about it, when I really think of what we do know about how the universe works.

If any god exists at all, it has had no apparent interest us, nor left any evidence yet found in the universe of its hand, so why should we say anything about such a being at all?

My answer, for purely human ones, and not the best of the lot either.

Comments and thoughts appreciated,

.T.

"...I do not believe-that-there-is-no-god. I am, however, convinced that there is no god, which is a totally different stance and takes me on to my second reason." - Douglas Adams

Mecha_Dude

6*9=42