This post represents the other bookend to the effort I made to illustrate why waxing philosophical on the question as to whether or not God exists is an extraordinarily tricky problem to tackle, no matter what your personal opinions (atheist, theist, agnostic) on the subject might be. Especially simplistic arguments fail to reveal the true complexity of the argument as a whole. To illustrate the gravity and true scope of the problem, I recruited the smartest person I know, an honest-to-God scientist recognized worldwide in his specific field of expertise, for an unbiased and unvarnished evaluation of the science and logic used in my article, focused on my own argument for God in particular to expose any and every perceived weakness in my reasoning. What follows next is primarily my friend's analytical feedback and constructive criticisms of my argument through our subsequent correspondence, which I've converted into an article to further elaborate on what we started... No matter what you actually believe, your worldview will be at least partially based on faith, whether you are a scientist, an atheist, or someone like me. Even if that faith is limited to yourself -- you've put faith in something, but not in nothing. The scientist places his or her faith in the scientific method and personal skill set to discern between illusion and reality. The atheist trusts intellect and reason will ultimately lead to evidence that validates their lack of belief in a supernatural God, while the theist has faith that his or her intellect is surpassed by something far … [Read more...]