Update 3: By one stating that, without a shadow of doubt, there is no god is no different than someone stating that, without a shadow of doubt, there is a god. Update 2: Agnosticism applies the scientific method. Atheism does not. If you are curious to this statement please read through this thread. Great minds throughout this thread. I do not mean to offend any atheist, I was one for many years, but if you do not understand my sentence above, you do not understand the scientific method to its full capacity. Maybe it is time to let go of the atheistic view, as I, and start to truly understand the meaning of science so that we can apply it with an open conscience. Maybe more people will start to apply science so that we can further benefit from its success over the theory of a creator, that has strongly become wishful hope. I strongly recommend reading about Carl Sagan, a extremely wise and intelligent person that has been quoted to say he is agnostic. Read his books. Carl provides great wisdom to why science has far benefited us over the theory of a creator. But if you apply the scientific method to the question of a creator, you will see it fits in just like any other question. The question of a creator has just been stuck in hypothesis stage of the scientific method with it's followers waiting for it to reach the scientific hypothesis stage, which is still far from law. In progress, the creator theory still trails behind "scientific" theories ,further and further each day. For example, we are smashing particles in extremely large accelerators ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Update: To all you great thinkers on this thread: I have created another thread titled "About Science, for anyone" to summarize my thoughts in my original post. Please feel free to read it and comment, or not. I just wanted to be a little more clear on where I was going with my original post (below), and not exclude anyone, being that I titled this one "For Agnostics only...". If you have not read this thread, feel free to read it if you wish. Thanks ---------------------------------------- Original Post: Anyone here truly consider themself agnostic? If not, please do not bother reading any further. I do not wish to start a debate. You can read if you wish, but please do not start a debate. I only have a simple question for agnostics (not atheists either ). I believe I have recently discovered that I am agnostic. For the longest time, I consider myself atheist and a "follower" of science. Thinking about science more, and believing very much in science, I realized that I must question science itself when it comes to where we come from. Science is about questioning, building hypotheses and the assumption and acceptance that the question may be proven wrong. So in itself, science must be questioned regarding where we come from. What is so great about science are the times when things are proven correct and can be seen by my own eyes, not just told in a book. Things that were once said to be divinity, but only to be proven as science. I very much favor science because of the evidence. However, I must accept that it could be wrong, regarding where we come from, because science is about accepting that the "question" is out there with the possibility of being wrong and I now feel I truly believe in science. I have been reading about Carl Sagan recently and came by a quote (wiki) from him shortly before his death that he stated he is agnostic. Surely, one of the biggest proponents of scientific education throughout the world, in our time, had a very deep understanding of science and pseudoscience. I started reading Sagan's "Demon-Haunted World", and am really enjoying it. It is sort of a liberating read. I feel that I have finally found someone else that shared the same views on the "big question" as I have questioned within myself recently. So, am I "getting" science and what it is to be agnostic? Like I said, I consider myself atheist for the longest time, but what I think what I really believe in is Science. I don't really care if that is not agnostic, because it is only a word. Just curious.