Tony: I think the issue is in how the questions are framed. > > A theist can examine purely how something was done and believe that God chose to do it that way regardless of the results. > > An Agnostic can believe or disbelieve whatever they choose, and the question of whether or not there is a God is of little importance. > > An Atheist, however, has to disprove the existence of God AND prove that everything had to be possible WITHOUT God. > > Atheist, by definition, have to prove a negative.-Welcome back! Well thought out. Atheists choose to not have an explanation and rely on contingency and chance as reasonable causation. That non sequitor makes no sense to me.