As a starting point it is very important to remember that the idea of a god was not based on any scientific discovers or knowledge but rather a lack of knowledge and false assumptions of how the universe works. Gods were invented by ancient men who tried to guess how nature operated. They knew that when an arrow is shot across the sky it was done so by a conscious being so when they saw that lightning shot across the sky they only naturally assumed it too was done so by a conscious being. Being dependent on nature they tried to figure out ways to influence nature with the assumption that it operates like they do. This is where superstition came from, when man did a certain dance and the rain stopped they thought the being controlling the rain must have liked that dance. Today we know such things were just coincidences. All gods are based on false assumptions and superstition yet many religious circles try desperately to hold on to their traditions by seeking evidence to support their folklore. Ironically, all statements and claims used to defend the existence of a particular god are also deeply rooted in a lack of knowledge and false assumptions of how the universe works.

Thanks to modern studies in the field of cognitive science we have a rather in depth understanding of how the brain functions and more impressively what causes and is required for consciousness. The consciousness, intelligence, and thinking ability of all conscious animals on earth including humans is constructed by, formed by, and dependent on the physical neuron patterns and structure of the brain. From the most complex conscious brains to the primitive nervous systems of the hydra, a tiny aquatic invertebrate. All brains along with every part of all conscious beings are formed out of non-life, atoms. The atoms that build up our body, brains and give us the ability to have consciousness were literally formed in by the stars. Long story short, a conscious being could not have created the universe since we know the universe was needed to create consciousness.

All of nature follows certain basic laws that we have a firm understanding of. These laws are not guidelines or policies like human laws but rather observations of the limitations of what nature can and cannot do without supernatural or divine intervention. In the case of Christianity its holy texts describe a god that regularly will and does perform supernatural miracles which go against all that we know about the laws of nature. Yet in real life we see nothing like this at all, the closest we get are non-supernatural miracles that tend to be nothing more than simple coincidences. If there was a conscious being in control of the universe he or she would be able to do something beyond the limits of nature. If the universe is controlled by the limits of nature it is safe to say that nature is the only one in control, not a supernatural conscious deity.

DNA has been nicknamed "The Language Of Life" because it is like a language. All languages and codes that us humans use have been invented by us humans so many creationists assume DNA must also have been created by a conscious being. This assumption fails because of two very simple reasons. Although DNA has many similarities to language and code it also has many differences to language and code and is not subject to the same limitations. We also know different ways of how DNA and it's predecessor RNA could have simply formed by natural means so saying DNA could not have formed without a conscious creator only proves a failure to keep up to date with the modern knowledge of DNA.

Some falsely preach that earth is perfect for life because of various reasons such as its distance from the sun and the tilt of its axis. They look at the odds of life just happening to be placed on the only planet in our galaxy that's perfect for it and assume a god must have personally placed us here and designed the planet for us. There are many problems with this common claim. The most obvious is that earth is NOT perfect for life. Throughout the history of life's existence it has been a vicious battle against nature to survive and life has gone through many mass extinctions, some even bigger than the mass extinction that devastated the end of the Cretaceous period. Another problem that should be obvious is that just because life can exist on earth does not mean that earth was made for life. Your shower is an ideal setting for fungus to grow but it obviously was not designed for the inhabitance of fungus. Life was a side effect of the conditions on earth, not the other way around. Also, although earth is the only planet in our solar system that can naturally sustain human life it it by no means the only planet in our universe that is capable of doing so. There are over one hundred billion galaxies in the universe each of which could potentially contain hundreds or even billions of separate solar systems. In light of this relatively modern knowledge the number of potential earth-like planets such as "Gliese 581 C" which could harbor life is to say the least, dramatically and unbelievably high. The odds of known life forming on just one of those planets is suddenly less impressive.

This is exactly the type of universe we would expect to see if there were no personal god.

of this universe is absolutely lethal to life, it’s a deadly radiation filled vacuum.


of all the matter in the universe goes to making black holes, not life bearing worlds.

Reproduction Kills Before modern medicine giving birth killed 1 out every 5 women.

If the universe was designed by a conscious been then that being had to have been extremely feeble-minded which goes against the concepts of all those who believe in a god. At a simple glance with limited knowledge on the subject the universe looks well organized and tidy but even a basic study of the universe will show a chaotic scrambled mess with no foresight in its planning. One clear example occurred within the fist second after the Big Bang, as matter was being formed out of energy so was anti-matter. When a particle of matter comes into contact with a particle of anti-matter they instantly annihilate each other. Thankfully the particles of matter had a slight advantage, for every one billion particles of anti-matter that was formed there were one billion and one particles of matter formed. The extra particles survived and without those surviving particles, the material universe would have ended before it was even one second old. Everything that we can see and touch is formed out of those surviving particles of matter. If a conscious being was to put any planning into the universe then why would he/she create anti-matter instead of just creating the matter needed? Click here for more examples of un-intelligent design.

You will commonly hear apologists preaching that there must be a god because the universe necessitates an intelligent designer. This is nothing but a false assumption produced by the same limited mindset that gave birth to the various gods back in the bronze age. No one with an in depth understanding of the universe would back such an assumptions because current knowledge tells us the complete opposite. No matter how elegant the universe appears it is still a chaotic mess and its natural formation all the way back to its birth is well understood showing absolutely no need to necessitate a conscious designer.

Yes life is complex but that does not mean it had a conscious designer. A snow flake is complex but it does not require a conscious designer. Life is actually overly complex with far too many unnecessary parts assembled in such a frantic mess that causes a wide range of faulty design flaws from avoidable limitations to cancer causing agencies showing that life certainly was not designed by a conscious being with the ability to plan ahead or work efficiently.

We currently know where everything come from as far back as the "Big Bang," but where did the ingredients of the Big Bang come from? Some falsely assume that since science does not know yet that science claims it all came from nothing. Science however does not make such a claim and does not claim that anything has ever came from nothing. Regardless many Christians go on to explain how something came from nothing by assuming that their god created all in existence out of nothing. However, if we are going to take this attempt of an explanation honestly we would need to ask where did that god come from? If one decides to say that is an unanswerable question or that a god always existed why not do as Carl Sagan suggest and save a step and conclude that the origin of the universe is an unanswerable question or that the universe always existed.

What does it matter if a person believes in a god? To answer that question let's look at the two different types of belief in a god or gods. Deism is the belief in a god who created everything but has not intervened with its creations. Theism is the belief in a god or gods (polytheism) that does intervene with its creations. Being a theist puts a major stranglehold on the progress of knowledge when actual explanations of how nature operates overlaps roles which theists have addressed to their god(s). A more severe issue is when theists assume their god intervened by personally handing down knowledge or commands as Christians do. When people think they know the word of a god they treat those words as absolute truth and dogma. This causes a great deal of conflicts for a society which is dramatically escalated when other people believe they have access to a contradicting set of absolute truths. The problems of deism is limited but deists still place themselves in an intellectual roadblock when it comes to a full understanding of the universe and their place in it.

Without resorting to belief in a god people are free to see the universe for its true beauty, knowledge and human progress can flourish, and the barriers of dividing world views can be taken down. Although a certain comfort will be lost when one lets go of belief in a god a more meaningful and honest comfort will be able to form when the seeking of real answers begins.