As a strong agnostic, [PZ Myers argument that "Either way, you’re an atheist — and that goes for the over-philosophized fussbudgets who insist that they’re agnostics, not atheists, because they aren’t 100% positive there aren’t any gods, only 99 44/100ths positive."] is my biggest frustration with atheists. Even in admitting their lack of conclusive evidence, they seem to have an obsession with quantifying the probability of God’s existence. I am unwilling to do this. Examining the best available evidence for the existence of God, an honest inquiry must find the question inconclusive. Beyond the fact that you cannot prove a negative, there is also the fine-tuning argument which is actually quite difficult for an atheist to disarm.Ugh. The Fine Tuning argument is fallacious on its face; it depends for its force our intuitive difficulty in grasping probability. The rebuttal is rather obvious: If naturalism were true and the physical laws of the universe were not conducive to life, then we wouldn't be here to observe the universe.
Sadly the author does not add "competent" to "honest inquiry".