Changes

:::It makes as much sense to me as "Despite this, they continue to deny the existence of [[The Flying Spaghetti Monster]] without any real scientific proof [therefore the FSM must be true]."  Runs on the same kinda of logic. Since there is no way to provide proof something doesn't exist, and there is "evidence" for the Christian God, it should trump the non-evidence for a lack of God therefore theism trumps atheism. It's intended to make scientists to look foolish, unscientific and dogmatic and to promote the idea of Evolution/Scientism as a religion. Though I will keep this article in mind if anyone brings up the "what proof and evidence do you have that atheism is accurate and correct?" --DavidS 11:09, 25 March 2013 (EDT)

:::It makes as much sense to me as "Despite this, they continue to deny the existence of [[The Flying Spaghetti Monster]] without any real scientific proof [therefore the FSM must be true]."  Runs on the same kinda of logic. Since there is no way to provide proof something doesn't exist, and there is "evidence" for the Christian God, it should trump the non-evidence for a lack of God therefore theism trumps atheism. It's intended to make scientists to look foolish, unscientific and dogmatic and to promote the idea of Evolution/Scientism as a religion. Though I will keep this article in mind if anyone brings up the "what proof and evidence do you have that atheism is accurate and correct?" --DavidS 11:09, 25 March 2013 (EDT)