I'm not arguing for one side or the other, just arguing that atheism isn't practical considering our limited understanding of the Universe.

Sanctimonious? Where did morality come into this? You're looking for the term self-righteous, and it doesn't apply here. As I said before, I'm not making an argument one way or the other, I'm just applying critical thinking skills and recognizing the flaws in atheism. I guess intelligence is just perceived as self-righteousness to people that see it utilized for a purpose other than something that they personally agree with, and something else when it is utilized for a purpose that aligns with one's preconceived notions.

Not having tangible evidence of something is no reason not to believe in the possibility. Billions and billions of people have died because they couldn't imagine that bacteria existed. There are people still in the world today that would kill you if you suggested that eating the brains of one's dead grandmother causes neurodegeneration (kuru).

Basically what I'm saying is that Atheism cannot possibly exist if critical-thinking is applied. Agnosticism, sure - but not atheism, particularly not when the belief relies on disproving myths and not the concept of creationism itself.

If one accepts that it is impossible to know whether or not we were created, they are agnostic. If one is certain that it is possible to know, without evidence, they are just as illogical as the people that they mock.

I'm not arguing for one side or the other, just arguing that atheism isn't practical considering our limited understanding of the Universe.

Sanctimonious? Where did morality come into this? You're looking for the term self-righteous, and it doesn't apply here. As I said before, I'm not making an argument one way or the other, I'm just applying critical thinking skills and recognizing the flaws in atheism. I guess intelligence is just perceived as self-righteousness to people that see it utilized for a purpose other than something that they personally agree with, and something else when it is utilized for a purpose that aligns with one's preconceived notions.

Not having tangible evidence of something is no reason not to believe in the possibility. Billions and billions of people have died because they couldn't imagine that bacteria existed. There are people still in the world today that would kill you if you suggested that eating the brains of one's dead grandmother causes neurodegeneration (kuru).

Basically what I'm saying is that Atheism cannot possibly exist if free-thinking is applied. Agnosticism, sure - but not atheism, particularly not when the belief relies on disproving myths and not the concept of creationism itself.

If one accepts that it is impossible to know whether or not we were created, they are agnostic. If one is certain that it is possible to know, without evidence, they are just as illogical as the people that they mock.