person I will respond to wrote:
me wrote:the burden of proof is on the believer, bitch.
And do you not believe that there is no God? Aye, it's a negative statement, but still, to make the claim that there is no God definitively is just as much an act of "faith" that you know all there is to know about that particular subject.
Theists (in general) believe that everything sprang into being through the will and direction of an omnipotent entity. The evidence usually presented (by the intelligent, at least) revolves around the level of complexity inherent in the system of nature and the repetition of complex mathematical patterns throughout creation, particularly pertaining to the "living" world. Atheists (currently) believe that the entire universe sprang into existence in a single instant, at a single point, for absolutely no reason. The evidence for this is, so far as I can tell, all relate to the spreading of the energy outward...and the actual manifestation is left as an "unknown", as apparently when all the energy of the universe is at ONE point, the laws of physics break down, and it is "impossible" to tell what came before. Granted, I haven't trudged through the mathematical proofs for the BBT, as I'm not a mathematician, so I could be misinterpreting things slightly...but so far as I know, I am not.
Given that (for instance) Judaism, the first of the Abrahamic Religions, says not the God created the objects of the Universe, but that God SEPARATED the indivisible into the objects of the Universe, methinks that it's a bit premature to rule theism out.
And don't even get me started on Quantum, String, M, or Holographic Theory...
EDIT: I realize that this post isn't really directed at you, but at the Holier-than-thou attitude of Atheists in general. Science isn't a Meta-Theory. It's a way of explaining the observable world. Nothing more, Nothing less.