THE ANGEL POSSENTI:
This refutation is going to work a little different because if you read the article this post is debunking (for the article, click here) there isn't much to it so I'm not going to put much in this, but here we go all the same:
Notice what happens when anyone is "miraculously cured". A person is sick, the person prays (or a prayer circle prays for the person) and the person is cured. A religious person looks at it and says, "God performed a miracle because of prayer!" That is the end of it.
(Not quite. That depends on what is meant by miracle: they could just mean praising God for instilling in man the capacity and concern for others to treat people. But if it meant full blown, no explanation from science or medicine, then it must be investigated before it can be called a miracle.)
A scientist looks at it in a very different way. A scientist looks at it and says, "Prayer had nothing to do with it - there is a natural cause for what we see here. If we understand the natural cause, then we can heal many more people suffering from the same condition."
(Except science has now admitted prayer does have benefits.)
In other words, it is only by assuming that the belief in prayer is a superstition and therefore God is imaginary that science can proceed.
(Really? All the people on these two lists would disagree with you:
The writer then goes on to talk about how antibiotics were discovered but the story he tells omits two important facts:
-both scientists involved in the discovery were Christians
-Both universities involved were founded by Christianity.
They determined what was actually happening through experimentation and then made useful medicines from the mold. They took a rational approach rather than a religious approach and we all benefit from penicillin and its many derivatives today."
(Except what we now call the scientific method was invented by a Christian).
The reason why scientists must assume that God is imaginary in order for the scientific method to work is because God is imaginary.
(Use circular reasoning much? Besides, there is a book out there that looks at what scientists actually think of the religion and science debate. I haven't gotten around to reading it yet, but as soon as I do, I'll put highlights of it on here).
Here's another refutation of God is Imaginary: click here.
Yet another proof that atheists are idiots.