Why atheism is wrong.

for one i hope that was sarcasm....and the same people who followed the bible insisted that the sun revolved around us...and put anyone to death who said otherwise. If you had any idea the definition of theory then you wouldnt bash evolution. it canabe proven. what cant 100% be proven is creation of life through evolution. but the theory most refer to is Darwins theory of evolution through natural selection. which CAN be proven and shown.

ArmoredAshes

There is no such thing as fact in science, simply evidence for or against a theory, which is not fact.

Finally a well thought out attack on atheism *applauds TC* Here's some other stuff that will have the atheists wetting their pants.

Evolution is so obviously wrong thereby making the only possible alternative, intelligent design, true.

Abiogenesis is also ridiculous.

This will keep the atheists thinking

And for the final blow read this.

Godly_Warrior

The first link completely lost me when it suggested that evolution would prove that a dog would build a house if you tie a hammer to its tail. :lol: Does a dog need a purpose for the house? What would be the point of building a house for it?

And the YouTube video was absolutely horrible. I only saw the last part of it while I was trying to read the article but it suggested as though because religion is hush-hush in the public workspace that means therefore it must be true. Just because people are sensitive when it comes to religion does not mean it is true. I've seen people more sensitive over trivial matters such as the ending of Harry Potter.

My pants are still dry.

Atheism is only wrong if you can prove the existence of God/the gods. Can you/they do so?

No? I thought not. Let atheists be atheists and theists be theists and the world will be peaceful.

tycoonmike

it never will happen...you have extremists on both ends that will sit and pig headedly argue that one of them HAS to be right...and that neither can coexist. there is room to explain how "god" could have started life on earth and allowed it to evolve...there are so many possibilities but neither wants to admit that...nothign is ever clear cut in the world

Atheism is only wrong if you can prove the existence of God/the gods. Can you/they do so?

No? I thought not. Let atheists be atheists and theists be theists and the world will be peaceful.

tycoonmike

Atheism in a scientific context does not presume any such nonsense. Science exists in the interests of identifying the nature of reality, and nothing else.

[QUOTE="tycoonmike"]

Atheism is only wrong if you can prove the existence of God/the gods. Can you/they do so?

No? I thought not. Let atheists be atheists and theists be theists and the world will be peaceful.

CRM_MOD

Atheism in a scientific context does not presume any such nonsense. Science exists in the interests of identifying the nature of reality, and nothing else.

Well, I can do that easily. Reality is what you make of it. If you believe God created all there is, then that is your reality. If you believe we are the creation of the previous universe, then that is your reality. If you believe we are the creation of another sentient lifeform, then that is your reality. In the absence of any conclusive evidence for all possibilities, that is the answer to atheism in the scientific context.

[QUOTE="CRM_MOD"][QUOTE="tycoonmike"]

Atheism is only wrong if you can prove the existence of God/the gods. Can you/they do so?

No? I thought not. Let atheists be atheists and theists be theists and the world will be peaceful.

tycoonmike

Atheism in a scientific context does not presume any such nonsense. Science exists in the interests of identifying the nature of reality, and nothing else.

Well, I can do that easily. Reality is what you make of it. If you believe God created all there is, then that is your reality. If you believe we are the creation of the previous universe, then that is your reality. If you believe we are the creation of another sentient lifeform, then that is your reality. In the absence of any conclusive evidence for all possibilities, that is the answer to atheism in the scientific context.

[QUOTE="ArmoredAshes"]

for one i hope that was sarcasm....and the same people who followed the bible insisted that the sun revolved around us...and put anyone to death who said otherwise. If you had any idea the definition of theory then you wouldnt bash evolution. it canabe proven. what cant 100% be proven is creation of life through evolution. but the theory most refer to is Darwins theory of evolution through natural selection. which CAN be proven and shown.

tycoonmike

There is no such thing as fact in science, simply evidence for or against a theory, which is not fact.

but thats the thing...once there is evidence against it said theory is no longer a theory...its discredited. but the evidence must be fact and not faith.

[QUOTE="CRM_MOD"][QUOTE="tycoonmike"]

Atheism is only wrong if you can prove the existence of God/the gods. Can you/they do so?

No? I thought not. Let atheists be atheists and theists be theists and the world will be peaceful.

tycoonmike

Atheism in a scientific context does not presume any such nonsense. Science exists in the interests of identifying the nature of reality, and nothing else.

Well, I can do that easily. Reality is what you make of it. If you believe God created all there is, then that is your reality. If you believe we are the creation of the previous universe, then that is your reality. If you believe we are the creation of another sentient lifeform, then that is your reality. In the absence of any conclusive evidence for all possibilities, that is the answer to atheism in the scientific context.

I don't beleive in anything other than what I experience as a human being, and beyond that, I process it through the scientific methodology.

[QUOTE="tycoonmike"][QUOTE="CRM_MOD"][QUOTE="tycoonmike"]

Atheism is only wrong if you can prove the existence of God/the gods. Can you/they do so?

No? I thought not. Let atheists be atheists and theists be theists and the world will be peaceful.

quiglythegreat

Atheism in a scientific context does not presume any such nonsense. Science exists in the interests of identifying the nature of reality, and nothing else.

Well, I can do that easily. Reality is what you make of it. If you believe God created all there is, then that is your reality. If you believe we are the creation of the previous universe, then that is your reality. If you believe we are the creation of another sentient lifeform, then that is your reality. In the absence of any conclusive evidence for all possibilities, that is the answer to atheism in the scientific context.

Well, what is reality to me but what I experience? For instance, I have never been to Australia before, therefore it does not exist within my reality. That's not to say Australia doesn't exist at all, that's just to say that it doesn't exist for me because I haven't experienced it yet.

Well, what is reality to me but what I experience? For instance, I have never been to Australia before, therefore it does not exist within my reality. That's not to say Australia doesn't exist at all, that's just to say that it doesn't exist for me because I haven't experienced it yet.

tycoonmike

Well this topic is starting to bore me. I'm outta here.qetuo6

Another funny thing I've noticed...out of the 170 or so posts in this thread, there's STILL no one who has provided a shred of evidence that there is a god.

Most haven't even ATTEMPTED to do so. Rather, the strategy they employ is to try (unsuccessfully) to poke holes in current scientific theory, and then imply that there must be a god because science can't explain EVERYTHING with 100% accuracy.

And then there are the gross misrepresentations of current scientific theory, which really do nothing more than show that the creationists haven't even taken 10 minutes to research what they're trying to debunk.

But all of that is avoiding the point. There is EVIDENCE for evolution. There is EVIDENCE for the big bang. Can anyone provide any EVIDENCE for creationism or the mere existence of any gods?

[QUOTE="tycoonmike"][QUOTE="ArmoredAshes"]

for one i hope that was sarcasm....and the same people who followed the bible insisted that the sun revolved around us...and put anyone to death who said otherwise. If you had any idea the definition of theory then you wouldnt bash evolution. it canabe proven. what cant 100% be proven is creation of life through evolution. but the theory most refer to is Darwins theory of evolution through natural selection. which CAN be proven and shown.

ArmoredAshes

There is no such thing as fact in science, simply evidence for or against a theory, which is not fact.

but thats the thing...once there is evidence against it said theory is no longer a theory...its discredited. but the evidence must be fact and not faith.

Not if there is evidence to the contrary. If there is, then all the evidence that was once fact is no longer so. That is my point, if a theory can be wiped out that easily, then they cannot be fact.

[QUOTE="Godly_Warrior"]

Finally a well thought out attack on atheism *applauds TC* Here's some other stuff that will have the atheists wetting their pants.

Evolution is so obviously wrong thereby making the only possible alternative, intelligent design, true.

Abiogenesis is also ridiculous.

This will keep the atheists thinking

And for the final blow read this.

Genetic_Code

The first link completely lost me when it suggested that evolution would prove that a dog would build a house if you tie a hammer to its tail. :lol: Does a dog need a purpose for the house? What would be the point of building a house for it?

And the YouTube video was absolutely horrible. I only saw the last part of it while I was trying to read the article but it suggested as though because religion is hush-hush in the public workspace that means therefore it must be true. Just because people are sensitive when it comes to religion does not mean it is true. I've seen people more sensitive over trivial matters such as the ending of Harry Potter.

My pants are still dry.

The dog bit was just saying that random mutations building a complex organism is as likely as a dog building a house by wagging his tail. It's just a simile that shows the ridiculous odds of evolution not a full blown analogy so stop being so dense about it.

The youtube video is just to show how atheists make assumptions and how God is present in every day life.

Care to address the last link or would you rather not have to get a change of pants.

Another funny thing I've noticed...out of the 170 or so posts in this thread, there's STILL no one who has provided a shred of evidence that there is a god.

Most haven't even ATTEMPTED to do so. Rather, the strategy they employ is to try (unsuccessfully) to poke holes in current scientific theory, and then imply that there must be a god because science can't explain EVERYTHING with 100% accuracy.

And then there are the gross misrepresentations of current scientific theory, which really do nothing more than show that the creationists haven't even taken 10 minutes to research what they're trying to debunk.

But all of that is avoiding the point. There is EVIDENCE for evolution. There is EVIDENCE for the big bang. Can anyone provide any EVIDENCE for creationism or the mere existence of any gods?

MrGeezer

That's because some of us know better than to get involved in a battle that ends in a stalemate. The opposite is true for atheists, they cannot provide evidence against God's existence. And don't try to make the claim that I am using absolutes to describe God's existence. I believe It to exist. I don't know if It does or not, but I believe anyways. I don't use absolutes to avoid the idea of the burden of proof.

I dont like bannanas...

Why must the concept of logic and reason seam so fallible here, if it weren't in the name of ego?!CRM_MOD

Because you cannot use rational thought to describe an irrational concept such as God and religion.

[QUOTE="CRM_MOD"]Why must the concept of logic and reason seam so fallible here, if it weren't in the name of ego?!tycoonmike

Because you cannot use rational thought to describe an irrational concept such as God and religion.

You lost me- God and Religion is bogus- read above.

for one i hope that was sarcasm....and the same people who followed the bible insisted that the sun revolved around us...and put anyone to death who said otherwise. If you had any idea the definition of theory then you wouldnt bash evolution. it canabe proven. what cant 100% be proven is creation of life through evolution. but the theory most refer to is Darwins theory of evolution through natural selection. which CAN be proven and shown.

WHOA! Wait there just a minute buster, you are confusing christians from catholics, catholics are not christians, they hardly follow the bible. They are just an occult who have been dominant in the medieval ages. Yes they really were a religion bent on world domination, the pope has a lot of power even to this day. They kept the bible from the average man, so that the common man would be ignorant of truth. But ever since the printing press came along.. The common man has been able to read the bible and the shocking truth came out. See the catholics actually would tell the population that only priest can interpret the bible, it is too "confusing," for common man. Now what baffles me is that a lot of people still believe in that crap even though it goes against the bible so wholesomely. But they have convinced so many that catholicism is just another denomination of christianity, no sir it is just another false religious system. They have loads of money, they can control the economy of every country at this point. Yes catholics put everyone to death who does not follow it hitler was a catholic himself which explains the holocaust).

The problem with evolution is this, THEY THINK IT IS PROVEN FACT, when there is no way you can prove it. Actually gods existance has been proven many time throughout the bible, you have to read the bible to know it. The problem is evolutionist vigorously teach this in school, pushing there beliefs down everyones throats, so I am offended they teach this "thoery," as if it was a fact.

2:1Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? Psalms 2

lol this thread is full of heathen rage, and people imagine a vain thing. :o

That's because some of us know better than to get involved in a battle that ends in a stalemate. The opposite is true for atheists, they cannot provide evidence against God's existence. And don't try to make the claim that I am using absolutes to describe God's existence. I believe It to exist. I don't know if It does or not, but I believe anyways. I don't use absolutes to avoid the idea of the burden of proof. tycoonmike

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

Another funny thing I've noticed...out of the 170 or so posts in this thread, there's STILL no one who has provided a shred of evidence that there is a god.

Most haven't even ATTEMPTED to do so. Rather, the strategy they employ is to try (unsuccessfully) to poke holes in current scientific theory, and then imply that there must be a god because science can't explain EVERYTHING with 100% accuracy.

And then there are the gross misrepresentations of current scientific theory, which really do nothing more than show that the creationists haven't even taken 10 minutes to research what they're trying to debunk.

But all of that is avoiding the point. There is EVIDENCE for evolution. There is EVIDENCE for the big bang. Can anyone provide any EVIDENCE for creationism or the mere existence of any gods?

tycoonmike

That's because some of us know better than to get involved in a battle that ends in a stalemate. The opposite is true for atheists, they cannot provide evidence against God's existence. And don't try to make the claim that I am using absolutes to describe God's existence. I believe It to exist. I don't know if It does or not, but I believe anyways. I don't use absolutes to avoid the idea of the burden of proof.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this thread wasn't started by an atheist. It was started by a creationist to serve as an attack against atheism (and evolution). So if you realize that the TC's entire argument is a load of horse****, why are the people defending him not backing him up with some actual evidence?

The youtube video is just to show how atheists make assumptions and how God is present in every day life.

Care to address the last link or would you rather not have to get a change of pants.

Godly_Warrior

The other links were horrible enough. I don't plan reading an entire book to the ending if the attention getter wasn't satisfying.

And the YouTube video addressed how the "concept of God" is present in everyday life. Just like children act well because of the "concept of Santa Claus". It doesn't mean Santa exists.

[QUOTE="tycoonmike"]

[QUOTE="CRM_MOD"]Why must the concept of logic and reason seam so fallible here, if it weren't in the name of ego?!CRM_MOD

Because you cannot use rational thought to describe an irrational concept such as God and religion.

You lost me- God and Religion is bogus- read above.

My point is that logic and reason is rational thought. God and religion is irrational thought. Rationality and irrationality, in this case, mean the mathematical terms, not the psychological terms. You can't define infinity, an irrational term, by any defined number, which are rational terms, because infinity is composed of all numerical values, known and unknown, and therefore consist of far more than simply one rational term.

Atheism is only wrong if you can prove the existence of God/the gods. Can you/they do so?

No? I thought not. Let atheists be atheists and theists be theists and the world will be peaceful.

tycoonmike

So an argument is only right if the opposing argument is wrong? Smells a little fishy too me.

[QUOTE="tycoonmike"]That's because some of us know better than to get involved in a battle that ends in a stalemate. The opposite is true for atheists, they cannot provide evidence against God's existence. And don't try to make the claim that I am using absolutes to describe God's existence. I believe It to exist. I don't know if It does or not, but I believe anyways. I don't use absolutes to avoid the idea of the burden of proof. foxhound_fox

Now you're the one putting words in my mouth. I never said God did exist. I said I believe God exists, and left it at that. I don't know if It does or doesn't exist, and I don't actively pursue the knowledge because I don't see the point. Who would believe me even if I did find out if It did or didn't exist?

[QUOTE="Godly_Warrior"]The youtube video is just to show how atheists make assumptions and how God is present in every day life.

Care to address the last link or would you rather not have to get a change of pants.

Genetic_Code

The other links were horrible enough. I don't plan reading an entire book to the ending if the attention getter wasn't satisfying.

And the YouTube video addressed how the "concept of God" is present in everyday life. Just like children act well because of the "concept of Santa Claus". It doesn't mean Santa exists.

[QUOTE="tycoonmike"]

Atheism is only wrong if you can prove the existence of God/the gods. Can you/they do so?

No? I thought not. Let atheists be atheists and theists be theists and the world will be peaceful.

kayn83

So an argument is only right if the opposing argument is wrong? Smells a little fishy too me.

I'm going to elaborate. If atheism is wrong, then a number of versions of different theism could be right and the one which is right doesn't have to be one of which a person believes in. But if theism is wrong, the only alternative would be atheism.

[QUOTE="tycoonmike"]Atheism is only wrong if you can prove the existence of God/the gods. Can you/they do so?

No? I thought not. Let atheists be atheists and theists be theists and the world will be peaceful.kayn83

So an argument is only right if the opposing argument is wrong? Smells a little fishy too me.

Since one side of the argument is "God exists" and the other is "God doesn't exist," someone is going to be right and someone is going to be wrong (assuming proof does exist).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this thread wasn't started by an atheist. It was started by a creationist to serve as an attack against atheism (and evolution). So if you realize that the TC's entire argument is a load of horse****, why are the people defending him not backing him up with some actual evidence?MrGeezer

[QUOTE="tycoonmike"][QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

Another funny thing I've noticed...out of the 170 or so posts in this thread, there's STILL no one who has provided a shred of evidence that there is a god.

Most haven't even ATTEMPTED to do so. Rather, the strategy they employ is to try (unsuccessfully) to poke holes in current scientific theory, and then imply that there must be a god because science can't explain EVERYTHING with 100% accuracy.

And then there are the gross misrepresentations of current scientific theory, which really do nothing more than show that the creationists haven't even taken 10 minutes to research what they're trying to debunk.

But all of that is avoiding the point. There is EVIDENCE for evolution. There is EVIDENCE for the big bang. Can anyone provide any EVIDENCE for creationism or the mere existence of any gods?

MrGeezer

That's because some of us know better than to get involved in a battle that ends in a stalemate. The opposite is true for atheists, they cannot provide evidence against God's existence. And don't try to make the claim that I am using absolutes to describe God's existence. I believe It to exist. I don't know if It does or not, but I believe anyways. I don't use absolutes to avoid the idea of the burden of proof.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this thread wasn't started by an atheist. It was started by a creationist to serve as an attack against atheism (and evolution). So if you realize that the TC's entire argument is a load of horse****, why are the people defending him not backing him up with some actual evidence?

I can't speak for the others, but I came to this thread to see if I couldn't deflate a few egos. People claiming evolution is fact and that you can find out empirically if God exists. To answer your question, however, I'm not defending him because I know a sinking ship when I see one. I'm simply the shark waiting to chomp the fools who decide to muddy the waters with the blood of false reasoning.

What a mess this is- does no one have the precept of logic and reason on their side, or only egotistical selfishness?CRM_MOD

Probably the latter, myself included.

I try to approach things with logic and reason but the fact that I post this in spite of that I can't change people's beliefs shows my more colorful egotistical selfish side.

well heres my stab at it.

im not an athiest or a religious person, i dont really give a crap about what happened and how were made. but i seem to support evolution more.

heres why: since these site point out the flaws in evolution... how about this.

1.how is it possble that the virgin mary gave birth to jesus? like its freaken impossible for that to happen. he didnt just pop outta her.

2.how a spirtual being created the universe, he just waved his hands and everything appeared? if so why created the dinosauers and etc? why not create humans right off the bat and have them be very intelligent and well behaved? does god like to see people like hitler and stalin torture and kill innocent others? why create evil if it just causes problems?

3. if god created everything, why give humans the ability to doubt him? (athiests)

4. how did jesus comeback to life? if god gave him power to come back to life, why not modern heros that save people lives and change the world for the good?

5. does anybody know the one largest cause of war in human history? religion.

6. which religion is correct? christianity, judism, the ancient greek faiths? they may all connect to a greater being, but which is the true greater being if there is one?

7. can anyone actually prove there is a god, that jesus actually existed?

8. why do gods preists rape young boys?

9. there is evolution in people. why are people from africa black, to help defend from the suns rays which are so strong in the area. people as a whole have gotten larger in stature, not only fat wise but height, people nowadays are much bigger than people in the 1800's

Since one side of the argument is "God exists" and the other is "God doesn't exist," someone is going to be right and someone is going to be wrong (assuming proof does exist).scorch-62

[QUOTE="scorch-62"]Since one side of the argument is "God exists" and the other is "God doesn't exist," someone is going to be right and someone is going to be wrong (assuming proof does exist).foxhound_fox

This is one of those philosophical arguments that has no empirical "proof" to prove either side "correct." "God" (or any deity) is a metaphysical being that exists beyond our perception and current level of existence (our physical bodies and conscious/unconscious minds). There is no way a piece of evidence that currently resides in our realm of existence that could prove that one of those metaphysical beings exists or doesn't exist. It is an impossibility.

The argument can never end since nether side can literally end up "winning."

Exactly why I said "assuming proof exists." ;)

well heres my stab at it.

im not an athiest or a religious person, i dont really give a crap about what happened and how were made. but i seem to support evolution more.

heres why: since these site point out the flaws in evolution... how about this.

1.how is it possble that the virgin mary gave birth to jesus? like its freaken impossible for that to happen. he didnt just pop outta her.0diablo0

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]Correct me if I'm wrong, but this thread wasn't started by an atheist. It was started by a creationist to serve as an attack against atheism (and evolution). So if you realize that the TC's entire argument is a load of horse****, why are the people defending him not backing him up with some actual evidence?foxhound_fox

I know, but his thread title indicated that he was TRYING to attack atheism.

Of course, creationists also make the mistake of thinking that they're the same thing, but I sort of think that's beside the point.

I'm gonna assume he was trying to attack atheism as a gift to him. Because the standard if proof there is lower. If you want to prove creationism, you have to prove that there's a potential creator AND you have to prove that he actually created something. Meanwhile, if you want to prove that there's a god, all you have to do is prove that there's a god.

I figure I'll make it easy on these guys.

[QUOTE="0diablo0"]

well heres my stab at it.

im not an athiest or a religious person, i dont really give a crap about what happened and how were made. but i seem to support evolution more.

heres why: since these site point out the flaws in evolution... how about this.

1.how is it possble that the virgin mary gave birth to jesus? like its freaken impossible for that to happen. he didnt just pop outta her.foxhound_fox

A woman who is a virgin can get pregnant. The hymen have perforations which can allow sperm to pass into the vagina causing pregnancy. The odds are extremely low but they exist. A virgin birth is possible, just not one caused by God.

thank you on agreeing with me, and yes i guess that is possible, but my question. what the hell is the point of this?

All humans have a central medium of understanding, and this becomes the institutional modicum, and the rest of us are left on the sidelines.

Humanity loves normality, and normality loves humanity.

[QUOTE="tycoonmike"]

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"][QUOTE="tycoonmike"]That's because some of us know better than to get involved in a battle that ends in a stalemate. The opposite is true for atheists, they cannot provide evidence against God's existence. And don't try to make the claim that I am using absolutes to describe God's existence. I believe It to exist. I don't know if It does or not, but I believe anyways. I don't use absolutes to avoid the idea of the burden of proof. SegaGenesisfan

Now you're the one putting words in my mouth. I never said God did exist. I said I believe God exists, and left it at that. I don't know if It does or doesn't exist, and I don't actively pursue the knowledge because I don't see the point. Who would believe me even if I did find out if It did or didn't exist?

How is god remotely irrational, he is perfect. :roll: Your self rightousness is quite offending to be honest. The whole point of the bible is to save you from stupid religions, and irrational thoughts. Actually the whole point of jesus is to get rid of religion, religion is evil, the whole point is christ himself. The bible is a very rational book, surpasses any other book in logic, it is perfect in all ways. It has no errors whatsoever, the King James version is the only book with the written words of god.

If God is omnipotent and omniscient, then God is irrational. It is infinite. That is why I use "It" to describe God instead of "He" because "He" is an absolute term and "It" is a relative term. Only relative terms can define God because God is infinite. You cannot describe God with words like good, beneficient, honorable, or wise without naming their opposites, evil, fickle, dishonorable, and ignorant, because It is all these things and more.

Do not think of irrational in the sense of psychology, but in the sense of mathematics. Infinity is the only word that can accurately describe God.

How is god remotely irrational, he is perfect. :roll: Your self rightousness is quite offending to be honest. The whole point of the bible is to save you from stupid religions, and irrational thoughts. Actually the whole point of jesus is to get rid of religion, religion is evil, the whole point is christ himself. The bible is a very rational book, surpasses any other book in logic, it is perfect in all ways. It has no errors whatsoever, the King James version is the only book with the written words of god. SegaGenesisfan

[QUOTE="kayn83"][QUOTE="tycoonmike"]

Atheism is only wrong if you can prove the existence of God/the gods. Can you/they do so?

No? I thought not. Let atheists be atheists and theists be theists and the world will be peaceful.

Genetic_Code

So an argument is only right if the opposing argument is wrong? Smells a little fishy too me.

I'm going to elaborate. If atheism is wrong, then a number of versions of different theism could be right and the one which is right doesn't have to be one of which a person believes in. But if theism is wrong, the only alternative would be atheism.

Yes, that sounds more accurate. Keep in mind, there could be no God but we could still have been created by some divine occurence or something else.

[QUOTE="kayn83"][QUOTE="tycoonmike"]Atheism is only wrong if you can prove the existence of God/the gods. Can you/they do so?

No? I thought not. Let atheists be atheists and theists be theists and the world will be peaceful.scorch-62

So an argument is only right if the opposing argument is wrong? Smells a little fishy too me.

Since one side of the argument is "God exists" and the other is "God doesn't exist," someone is going to be right and someone is going to be wrong (assuming proof does exist).

Well what if we were created by aliens. Should they be classified as a God, sounds more like our creators and nothing more. What I'm getting at is that we shouldn't (generally) consider one side of an argument false as there can always be some form of truth that we can extract out of it.