Christian Science Part 2

Christian Science strongly presents the view that through faith, one can cure any disease and even death. I'd like to see even one believer who has, through faith, avoided ever being sick or injured. Their belief is not in any way supported by evidence.
As shown earlier, prayer and faith have no appreciable effect on healing.

"The Journal of the American Medical Association (22 September 1989) reported on a study of more than 5.5 thousand Christian Scientists as compared to a lay group of almost 30 thousand. The death rate among Christian Scientists from cancer was double the national average, and 6 percent of them died from causes considered preventable by doctors. The non-Christian Scientists on the average lived four years longer if they were women and two longer if they were men"

Thus following Christian science, you are apparently more, not less, likely to die of a preventable disease.

Final verdict: False Religion

Reiteration of the Basic Rules

This whole religious argument thing has been going on for quite a while, so I thought I'd reiterate the criteria I use to make judgment. Aside from the already posted 3 rules, and the later 4th rule, There are really only two criteria, either one of which failing proves a false religion.
Internal consistency and external consistency.
A system is internally consistent if all of it's laws, rules, guidelines and beliefs do NOT contradict any others. Most religions fail this test.
A system is externally consistent if it agrees with reality. Most religions also fail this test. An example would be a religion that declares that the main staple of human food is the rock. Humans cannot digest rocks. That's a fact so if some religion made such a claim, it would be inconsistent with reality and thus false.

Now, granted my system means that if even one thing is off, the religion is declared false, but considering that the general claim is not that the religion is a "good idea" or that it is "pretty accurate" but rather that it is absolute incontestable truth. Therefore, it is my contention that even one thing wrong disproves the religion as a whole, even if some of it's beliefs are in fact true.

For example, while I have proven Christianity false, I have NOT disproved nor argued that God does not exist. This would require a much more complete and in-depth investigation then I'm willing to invest at the moment, therefore such a belief remains "possible but unproven". In fact let me create a ranking system while I'm at it:

Absolute Truth: verified and proven facts or ideas that cannot be false, and anything whose state is given by strict definition (saying a leaf is a leaf is true because it is, by definition, a leaf and thus cannot be false. It has nothing to do with beliefs, but simply terminology systematically applied to observable reality.)

Likely Truth: Ideas that one has heard from a trusted and reliable source as being truth, and for which the evidence is readily available but not yet reviewed or verified.

Probable: Anything that is likely to be true, but unverified.

Possible: Anything that is unlikely to be true but has not been disproved

Improbable: Anything that is highly unlikely to be true, or has been declared false by a trusted, reliable source, but for which there is lack of evidence disproving it or the evidence has not been reviewed.

False: Anything that is verifiable as not true. (All "False Religion" labels)

So the existence of God remains Possible and is under review for upgrade to Probable, or down grade to Improbable (anyone who wants to make an argument, feel free to post comment.