dude, thanks for chopping off the rest of my post!
firstly, you didnt have a point. if you did, you didnt bother to post it. secondly, the only thing i said about kenneth's definition was that it wasn't that bad. i didnt say it was totally accurate. he was on the right track though in that a "fact" really is an opinion. nothing's 100%. God *could* exist - it's just not probable or likely giving what we "know" and can "prove" about our universe.
i didnt comment on the "popular" part. i dont know exactly what he meant by that. but thanks for trying to twist my words around so it looks like i did.