modern atheists often claim there is no evidence of God. Are they confusing evidence and science?

They don't even know the origin of the physical forces and it's right there in Genesis 1:1 ..

God Created...........

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

A Fine-Tuned Universe—By Chance?

One major question has to do with the fine-tuning of our cosmos. Why is the universe equipped with fixed physical laws and with natural constants that are precisely and ideally suited to support a planet like ours and all the life on it?

What do we mean by fine-tuning? Consider, for instance, the precise settings of four fundamental physical forces: electromagnetism, gravity, strong nuclear force, and weak nuclear force.* These forces affect every object in the universe. They are set and balanced so precisely that even slight changes could render the universe lifeless.

To many reasoning minds, the explanation simply has to be something more than mere coincidence. John Polkinghorne, formerly a physicist at Cambridge University, concluded: “When you realize that the laws of nature must be incredibly finely tuned to produce the universe we see, that conspires to plant the idea that the universe did not just happen, but that there must be a purpose behind it.”

Australian physicist Paul Davies made a similar point: “There is no doubt that many scientists are . . . scornful of the notion that there might exist a God, or even an impersonal creative principle.” He added: “Personally I do not share their scorn. . . . I cannot believe that our existence in this universe is a mere quirk of fate, . . . an incidental blip in the great cosmic drama.”

The scientific process is based on the use of evidence and observations to prove a fact. So it's unlikely an experienced scientist would get the two terms confused. I don't know what the heck you think evidence is, but then again, I don't care either.

Please site those "leading scientists" that "have recognized that Universe is a great evidence for creator". I think you're fibbing.

Science is not about god. Religion is about god. There is no evidence that "things" were "created before they got evolved". That is a religious claim.

"Yet many leading scientists have recognized that Universe is a great evidence for creator."

LIAR... not one scientist of note believes in invisible sky critters.

Stop reading those LYING cretinist websites...

"Science is about discovering what God created"

LIAR... science is about discovering the natural world...

Not entertaining the wild baseless speculation of cretinists.

"I've been cruising this planet for over 60 years.

IF God existed he would know what sort of evidence would convince me of his existence… if he wanted me to know it ;)

So far?

Nothing; nada; zilch."

I suppose HE either doesn't care about ME in any way whatsoever…

OR

God is imaginary... I'm going with the latter.

I’m 100% certain god is imaginary.

If he really existed he would have found a way to convince me he exists.

Obviously he hasn't cos just as obviously he doesn't.

If you wanted to convince someone you existed, what lengths would you go to?

Would you drop a few seriously ambiguous ‘clues’... OR, introduce yourself.

Seriously - this has SCAM written all over it.

And-Or

Pretend you were some place and you were invisible – let’s say 50% of the inhabitants “knew” and “loved” you – let’s say you wanted the other 50% of the inhabitants to “know” and “love” you too… cos you really do love them all soooo unconditionally…

What lengths would you go to convince them?

Seriously - this has BOOLSHYT written all over it.

And-OR

“Understand that:

Dreams are not evidence.

Wishful thinking is not evidence.

Logical fallacies are not evidence.

Personal revelation is not evidence.

Illogical conclusions are not evidence.

Disproved statements are not evidence.

Unsubstantiated claims are not evidence.

Hallucinations/delusions are not evidence.

Information that is ambiguous is not evidence.

The Universe doesn't care what you believe in.

Data that requires a certain belief is not evidence.

Information that cannot be verified is not evidence.

Information that cannot be falsified is not evidence.

Experiments with inconclusive results are not evidence.

Information that is only knowable by a privileged few is not evidence.

Experiments that are not and cannot be duplicated by others are not evidence.

The wonderful thing about science is that it doesn't ask for your faith, only your eyes.”

~

Instead of claiming "many leading scientists", can you bring any name?

Because real reading scientists, like Stephen Hawking, the late Carl Sagan, Peter Higgs, Roger Penrose, the late Richard Feynman, etc were atheists.

There is no god. This may not be to your liking, but that is what it is. Face the facts.

Edit: surely you jest? Dawkins is the most ardent god denier there is. Hawking has famously stated that, not only there is no god, there is no need for a god.

Weinberg has even quipped "With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil—that takes religion. "

Yet many leading scientists have recognized that Universe is a great evidence for creator.

Name some.

information that God exists... might contain something traceable to the Bible, considering the fact that it extremely is the professional archives on him. It can not be something that people can administration, the two, like "a conflict will take place and a guy would be there and another people will build a construction." It must be the two an extraordinary prediction of a organic experience, or an unnatural experience. It ought to narrate to the Bible, otherwise it must be the artwork of Zeus.

"Yet many leading scientists have recognized that Universe is a great evidence for creator."

Lying for "god" is still lying. Shame on you.

"Yet many leading scientists have recognized that Universe is a great evidence for creator."

Yet you post no sources. Typical. You have nothing.

Science is about explaining the natural universe with natural processes.

It can not and will not provide evidence for a god.

Years ago, atheists were killed for just admitting their lack of faith.

You misunderstand science if you think "science is about discovering what God created."

As we have learned more and more science, there is no need for a god.

"Yet many leading scientists have recognized that Universe is a great evidence for creator." But why? It's seemingly chaotic and 99.99999% wasted space.

No, science is about discovering the truth, actual facts. If you go at it assuming that you are trying to prove 'God', you are corrupting the science.

Just so you know, your interpretation of evolution is not supported in any way by the bible, which quite clearly makes many stements which directly contradict the concept that humans 'evolved'