>>47

Of course, personally, you think. You can start by not making assumptions for which can't be proven. Science doesn't say that it can't be proven so it's false, it states it can't be proven so it is irrelevant to current working data.

What's with the militant Agnostics? They're so against Atheists but I, as an Atheist, don't say there's no god but that there's currently no sufficient proof for a god such as the Abrahamic one so it is irrelevant to my daily activities and can safely rule it out. Though as I said earlier, I think an intelligent universal entity seems plausible but then there's the 'who made that' entity question.