Argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy.
Straw man fallacy
Straw man fallacy, and atheism is not a belief.
Straw man fallacy and a
poisoning of the well fallacy
Appeal to authority fallacy
The Harry Potter books claim wizards are real, are they real?
Look, I'll keep this short, as it's clear you are very very confused in your rationale, so lets start with some basic facts, and I'll bullet point them for you, you can either try and learn from your errors in that post or not, it's up to you.
- Atheism is defined as the lack or absence of belief in any deity or deities, and my atheism reflects that primary dictionary definition, I do not hold a belief that no deity exists, I simply don't believe any deity exists as there is no objective evidence.
- Agnosticism is defined as the belief that nothing is known or can be known about god. If I am faced with a claim or concept of a deity that is unfalsifiable then I remain agnostic about it, but also disbelieve it as we can't learn anything from unfalsifiable claims.
- An unfalsifiable claim is a claim where there is no conceivable way to falsify it, even if it were false.
- Logic is a method of reasoning that adheres to strict principles of validation, something is rational only if at adheres to those principles.
- In informal logic, which is everyday reasoning, fallacies are called common logical fallacies.
- You have use several of these fallacies in the first few sentences, and I have indicated this above, explained which fallacies, and linked brief definitions of them, so that you can if you want. see the logical errors in your claims.
I hope this helps, but if you don't want to understand what I've said, or atheism or how to steer clear of such basic errors in reasoning, then that is of course your right.
I won't ask you to demsonrate objective evidence for any deity, as I normally do, as you seem very convinced to the point of being closed minded that claims and assertions are actually evidence, but they are not.
One last thing, if you are interested in learning some of the vast amount of objective evidence that makes evolution a scientific fact then you can visits the
talkorigins website, this site also has a large database of creationist claims, and debunks these with accepted scientific evidence. now again I doubt you want to view your belief critically, but if you do the evidence at that site is an enormous body of facts and information all scientifically valid.
Oh and if the universe is not over 13 billion years old, you might want to consider how we can see light that has travelled from parts of the universe that is more than 13 billion light years away from our solar system. Claiming things can't have happened by chance, when a) they have already happened, and b) they have not happened purely by chance is a deeply flawed way to deny a scientific fact. Claiming it can only therefore have been created by a deity is called a
false dichotomy fallacy, I have linked an explanation for you.
It's not a choice between scientific fact, and unevidenced claims involving inexplicable magic or an unevidenced deity. That is the fallacy, if science were completely overturned right now, it would not make your creationist beliefs valid, as you can offer no objective evidence to support it.
regards