mike the wiz writes:
According to the USUAL definition of a creator, (rather than the definition used by atheists, of, "nothing that exists", LOL) there is plentiful evidence of God, in all things which have order, specified complexity, genius solutions in nature, such as the aggregate eye obeying several very complex physical laws, neat formulas physicists largely tell us indicates theism rather than not, in other words, it is more reasonable to expect from a Godless world, a random chaotic mess, and where we find beautiful design, order, a well laid plan riddle with contingencies, whatever the usual designer thing is, we find evidence consistent with God.
Defining God into existence is little more than begging the question. I could define Thor as the creator of lightning, and then use lightning as evidence for Thor, but I doubt you would find it that compelling.
Why? Invisibility is not only shared with false things but also with true things. A higgs boson was believed, not "known", for a long time. In the same way we see the effects of a creation but not the required creator.
The Higgs Boson was not defined as being invisible as God is. That's the difference. Once again, you beg the question when you claim that a creation requires a supernatural deity.
The answer is because our imagination can create false things because false things can be invisible, therefore it is a tautology, that anything you can think up can be equal to God in God's invisibility.
Imagination is the most parsimonious answer. When there is no distinguishable observable difference between a claimed entity existing and not existing, then parsimony points to not existing as the best answer.
™ Version 4.2
