I like the main page you created, it made me laugh inside. the comments and questions you respond to are either made up, or created by 12 year olds, how a bout debating some real theology, even if this website is a joke, like it appears to be? anyway instead of bitching at you like it seems most people here do, i just want to ask you some questions. and hey, maybe if your lucky ill turn into someone like you.

- how do you believe the universe was created? assuming you are like most other atheists it would be evolution, and don't get me wrong, there is plenty of evidence for evolution, even though it hasn't genetically linked one species to another. but you reject the idea of a god influencing it. also the big bang. an explosion of substances and chemicals that creates life and a suitable place to live. the chances of which are the same as blowing up a book, in your case the bible, and the pieces landing in the same way it was originally. you know if the worlds axis tilt was off by one degree either way life wouldn't be able to exist? id rather believe in something outside of pure chance and coincidence. one more question .... if humans are more fit over monkeys to live, sense only the fittest survive, why are there still monkeys?

"If a watch proves the existence of a watchmaker but the universe does not prove the existence of a great Architect, the I consent to be called a fool." Voltaire

i know your first immature impulse is to call me a fool, but try and resists.

Wow, you managed to frame some very tired questions with quite a bit of condescension and insult -- a rare combination indeed, and one that put me in a foul mood almost immediately. I'll address your points one at a time.

1) "the comments and questions you respond to are either made up, or created by 12 year olds" -- So either I'm a liar or all of the people who write to me are juvenile. I'm guessing that you didn't read very much of my correspondence. Quite a bit of it was intelligent and insightful. None of it was made up by me.

2) "how a bout debating some real theology" -- I am happy to do so and have done so repeatedly in the past.

3) "how do you believe the universe was created?" -- I don't see any compelling evidence that the universe was created. The universe appears to be the result of natural processes.

4) "assuming you are like most other atheists it would be evolution" -- You assume incorrectly, and I believe that you are wrong about "most other atheists" as well. The theory of evolution does not have anything to do with the origin of the universe.

5) "there is plenty of evidence for evolution, even though it hasn't genetically linked one species to another." -- I can't understand where you go the impression that there has been no genetic link found between species. There is a massive amount of data showing genetic similarity between species -- humans and chimps, for example, are something like 95% genetically identical. If you mean something else, you are not making yourself clear.

6) "but you reject the idea of a god influencing it." -- I only reject the idea of god influencing it because I don't see any compelling evidence for such a thing. If there is a deity involved, then that deity's actions are indistinguishable from natural processes.

7) "also the big bang. an explosion of substances and chemicals that creates life and a suitable place to live." -- This is an incredible oversimplification of the issue, to the point of near meaninglessness. The big bang did not create life and suitable places to live any more than (from an evolutionary perspective) ancient fish created my parents. The big bang is how our universe began. No chemicals (and, depending on the definitions used, no substances) were involved. It made possible what came afterward, but did not in any meaningful sense create those results.

8) "the chances of which are the same as blowing up a book, in your case the bible, and the pieces landing in the same way it was originally." -- You give the impression that I believe the big bang threw a bunch of matter into the air and it fell into place as planets and living things. I believe no such thing, so your Bible analogy is irrelevant. You also give the impression that I believe the Bible should be destroyed. I do not believe any such thing and have read the Bible many times.

9) "you know if the worlds axis tilt was off by one degree either way life wouldn't be able to exist?" -- If I remember correctly, earth's axis moves over time in relation to the sun (which is why the north star isn't always Polaris), so if this is true I'd be surprised. But even if it is true, it doesn't bother me. I would expect that any planet with life on it would be suitable for life -- if the earth's tilt was such that we couldn't be here, then we wouldn't be here to worry about it.

10) "id rather believe in something outside of pure chance and coincidence." -- I can't argue with your personal opinion, but opinion on this point is not compelling evidence of anything but your desire to believe.

11) "if humans are more fit over monkeys to live, sense only the fittest survive, why are there still monkeys?" -- No scientist says that humans are more fit than monkeys to live. In fact, under some conditions it is more "fit" to be a monkey than a human. This question seems to reflect a gross misunderstanding of evolution.

12) "i know your first immature impulse is to call me a fool, but try and resists." -- Actually, my first impulse was to call Voltaire a fool since he asked me to. My second impulse was to be insulted by your calling me immature. So, having been worked into a rather bad mood by the tone of your letter, I will respond in kind. Your condescending missive is nothing more than a morass of tired arguments that anyone with a smattering of relevant scientific knowledge would be able to shrug off with nothing but a bit of sadness for the gross ignorance that they reflect. You do yourself no credit attempting to "challenge" me with what sounds like a collection of anti-atheist, anti-science one-liners passed around among the unlearned for the sole purpose of congratulating themselves for thinking of questions no unbeliever could possibly answer without going to the trouble of actually checking whether they make any sense.

If you do have some real theology you'd like to discuss, I'd love to hear it. But if this is the best you have to offer, then I suggest you do a lot of reading before you again attempt to show off your debating skills. You do neither yourself nor your beliefs credit.