I said that not directing it specifically at theists but people in general, although theists do tend to be not smart. And did you read my whole post? I state that there are some very smart theists, but the difference between the smart theists and your average traditional religionist theist is that the smart theists come up with logical, elaborate arguments for the existence of God and they use evidence to back up their claims, whilst the religionist uses the argument of divine revelation and when pressed for supplying any evidence for the existence of God they point out at the Universe as if the only explanation possible for the origin of the Universe were an omnipotent intelligent entity at the beggining that created everything. That is, out of the trillions of possible explanations for why something and not nothing exists, they believe that a magical entity with infinite powers is the only explantion possible.
I think it is one of the least probable explanations. Theists seem to assume because relity has an elaborate design, and that because a design requires planning and therefeore intelligence, that only something possesed of intelligence could have created the Universe. This is not true. Everything that exists that is elaborate is the result of aggregation from very simple things from processes of synthesis and derivation. For instance, Helium is formed by nuclear fusion of Hydrogen atoms. Heavier elements are formed until Carbon is made. Carbon has four nuclear bonds, which allows it to form long chains of complex molecules, which, through a process of blind selection, results in greater complex life forms.
Now, you could argue that if we reduce all the complexity of the Universe to simpler and simpler things, we eventually arrive at the origin of everything, which is a an incognita. We don't know what this cause is, but given the fact that everything that exists comes from simpler and simpler things progressively, then this initial cause should be by definition the simplest thing of all. It shouldn't be a complicated entity like God. The initial cause would be by the very definition the least intelligent property in the Universe since all higher complexity is derived from this initial cause. So the real question is this: can something that is possesed of even the slightest amount of intelligence arrise from nothing? Even the initial cause has some degree of complexity, even if nothing more than a pure axiomatic definition so the real question is whether intelligence requires itself or not to exist. If the answer is yes, then you could call this self-organizitaion process a form of self-awareness which could be called God. If not then there i no reason to assume the existnce of God.
Most physicists believe that the initial axiom from which everything else derives could have arrisen from nothing(the uncertainty principle), so there is no reason to assume an intelligence that begetted everything. However, I believe that the initial cause could require a self-organizing principle whcih could be called God, so I don't rule out the possibility of God. I am 90% atheistic and 10% agnostic. However, this god would be so radically different from the one of religious people that the fact that there could be this possibility does not prove the existence of God in the way most religious people believe in him.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
