So, somebody believing in God is just dumb, despite no evidence to say that a God didn't create the universe? That attitude of yours is dogma, pure and simple.
Even if we accept that there is a lack of belief against God creating the universe (not sure what that would mean formally), shouldn't a belief require affirmative proof, not just a lack of proof that it doesn't? If I flip a random coin, I don't have any "proof" that it will end up heads, but that doesn't make it rational to believe conclusively that it will end up tails. There's nothing "dogmatic" about any of this. Not even the rabid "New Atheism" crowd claims that there isn't the possibility of the existence of a God. They just happen to see theism as akin to believing that the Easter Bunny exists. No one can claim complete refutation of the existence of a metaphysical entity unless they claim they can objectively know their own omniscience.
Besides, you can't simultaneously argue that you're defending couching belief in metaphysical intangibles and then say you aren't defending "evolution deniers." Yes, you are.
Poll
