Now read again, I said I'm agnostic because both sides have arguments that are true, not wrong. It is the open mind that considers viewpoints from both sides, no matter how false one seems to be.
I'm not judging your view, so please don't get me wrong, but agnosticism for many just means being 'undecided' on or 'uninterested' in the God topic. It has really very little to do with arguments that are potentially true at both sides as you say.
In fact, it's easy to challenge your 'science can't prove God' argument as being relevant and valid in the exact same sense, but this time against God.
There's this old mockery in which someone wonders how God can be both omnipotent and all powerful when God obviously can't create a stone too heavy for him to lift, but at the same time being able to lift it anyway.
As for the science can't prove God argument, science at this point in time can't rule out the potential existence of God(s) indeed, but science can still speculate with what we do know and to be honest that doesn't really leave a whole lot of room for a God to exist (unless perhaps you believe in God in the pantheistic sense). The more science figures out about our universe and how it came into existence, the further back in the past a God would have to be placed to make sense, assuming it would make sense at all, which I personally seriously question.
Also don't forget the whole 'faith trade' in religion, which in practice means science BY DEFINITION (according to religious people) has a literally different understanding or definition of 'truth'. This means any kind of proof from whichever of the both perspectives, won't be recognized by the other.
You don't need to be open minded to see that in itself is nuts if all you're trying to do is a more objective kind of truth-finding. Science requires evidence, religion requires faith. It's a mute point to argue about how both at many times totally ignore this simple fact. It still doesn't mean one isn't bluntly wrong though!!
so if google is god, and we use google does this mean we use god? and google was man made, and cant exist without any serious business plan so god is a man made corporation that needs to rely on the economical strength of its customers to ensure a further relevance over the course of time.
The irony in all this is that the concept of modern day Gods in the Christian or Islamic sense can not exist without ignorant worshippers that believe in organized and highly profitable religion. A shame really, especially if there's some truth in there, having to literally pay for it would have been the last thing a God would have demanded.
At the very beginning mankind consisted of very much pantheistic nature-loving people. For a good reason, we could see and understand the sun's relevancy and so forth.
Obviously that's far closer to the truth, but I'm thinking oppression, mental/social control, war and what not were worth trading it in for deism... :s
anyway, i support the theory that google is god since that really is not as far fetched as an omnipotent being which defies the logic and physics of space and time to create a planet full of slaves in seven days yet he needs their love although he can easyly send us all to a hell his firstborn slaveangel created to fuck with him wichich makes no sense whatsoever.
Exactly!
