Agnosticism implies belief in the supernatural
Eric Bahrt writes that renowned atheist Richard Dawkins doesn’t explain the crucial point of how something can come out of nothing.
No, he doesn’t! But as I wrote earlier, Laurence M Krauss gives an explanation in his book “A Universe from Nothing: Why There is Something Rather than Nothing”. To choose between a rational theory or an irrational belief is easy for me: The bible and its ilk are fairy tales, and 99 per cent of religious people base their beliefs on these fairy tales.
If he wants to discover how life started on Earth, Mr Bahrt should read more of the numerous theories explaining this occurrence.
As for thoroughly debunking God’s existence, Dawkins did a good job but so did Stenger (“God, the Failed Hypothesis”), among many others.
Bahrt pretends to be an agnostic, claiming that the existence of God can neither be proved nor disproved. This doesn’t fit with what is implied when he asks who created the lowest life form in the first place.
Bahrt seems not to know a theory doesn’t imply an absolute certainty. Many theories in history were replaced by subsequent theories which explained a subject better – no arrogance involved whatsoever.
Egon
