[bk1000]

"That's a very clever statement, but here's the burden of proof on you: 1) Prove god existed, 2) Prove he created Adam and Eve. Hint: A book's say-so isn't empiric proof"

Prove He didn't. If it can't be proven that G-d does not exist it can be assumed that He must. The arguement is invalid. The point is regardless of it's origination,
the human body is made in such a way as to naturally facilitate heterosexual reproduction. Irrespective of your determined use of the associated components, the facts remain. If G-d is left out of the discussion altogether, the author's point is still valid

[adam_az]

"Prove He didn't."

I have nothing to prove. I didn't make the statement that there is no God, only that his existence is unprovable, and thus not a good thing to refer to as "fact."

I'm also not asserting that God exists in this thread, you are.

Prove your assertion.

[jimt]

If it can't be proven that G-d does not exist it can be assumed that He must.

If it can't be proven that fairies don't exist it can be assumed that they do.

If it can't be proven that the moon is not made of green cheese it can be assumed that it is.

If it can't be proven ghosts don't exist it can be assumed that they do.

Belief in God requires faith.