Usually when people ask the "God question," especially capital G, they have a particular god in mind -- and especially (in my experience, in the US) the Christian God. But having studied history, read some of the work of Joseph Campbell, etc., recognizing that over the millennia billions of people have worshiped nearly as many different gods and associated, you begin to have a certain perspective on things that makes it difficult to take any one dogma all that seriously.

Early on, it seems that people worshiped rivers, volcanoes, etc., as living spirits. These objects of worship became abstracted over time and (in certain respects) more sophisticated, but it ultimately boils down to the same thing -- and I would argue for the same sorts of reasons, which are mostly because people wish to be comforted in the dark. But is the Moses myth or the Christ resurrection really any more compelling than any number of cults that have lived and died over the course of the last six thousand years? I don't think so. I think it's more compelling for many people today because they are raised to believe in its truth, which is then supported by cultural forces. But if they had been born in another time and another place, they would be worshiping their mud idols with the same intensity of belief. It's all kind of an absurdity.

And for those who currently need to disabuse themselves of the Christian myths specifically, I would advise some exploration into the canonization of the modern Bible and the early histories of the Church. Whatever your stance on such pabulum as "Pascal's wager," etc., a little education can really shed some light into the "holiness" of Christian institutions and so forth, and if we expect to know a tree by its fruit, well...

I never said chances were not there. I never mentioned anything that would give the impression I do not now how old the universe is. This is pretty common in discussions like this...

But what I believe is that things so complex as dna and a cell, well for me this require an absurd amount of VERY fortunate coicidences, happening in a row during a very very long period of time, without the sequence never being broken by chance. 

Ahhhhh the ignorance card. Was waiting for this one. I perfectly understand the explanation the scientists give to life. I just think it is flawed and a few things does not make sense for me and that there must be more to it. 

Can you give an example on what is flawed?

If you were waiting for the "ignorance card" then why did you make an argument from ignorance in the first place?

I am not 100% in not believing in God, however I just don't see how it can be real. I always ask this; if god created us then who created him/her? It just wouldn't make sense to believe in something like that. But you never know.

As most things supernatural they come from a place of missing knowledge and understanding.

Yes, the probabilities of life existing are astronomically low, but do you know what's literally astronomically large? The universe. That puts the likelihood of these events massively into perspective. I mean it's not like the earth is in a very specific spot in the universe. It's just one of the quadrillions of planets where it could've happened. But those are all very gigantic or tiny numbers, so it's hard for people to grasp and they start trying to fill their gaps in understanding. It's exactly the same as flat earthers. They cannot grasp the actual size of the earth, so they don't understand that the surface of a sphere can appear flat if sufficiently sized.

Of course we cannot say that there is no god, but looking at the wealth of evidence we find in the universe and recognizing that all is based on simple causality and logic we can at least conclude that even if there is some kind of god, he'll most likely not be how the major religions depict him. It's obvious, if he exists, that he doesn't give a shit about earth or its people. For that earth is just too random. And if there is also life on other planets, which is statistically very likely, it just underlines that the loving, caring god who views humans as the pinnacle of his creation just doesn't make any sense.

With this conclusion in mind there is no point in worshipping, no matter if he exists or not. He clearly just wants us to live our lives and doesn't really care what happens with us.

It's ignorant to claim that things cannot happen by chance when you cannot even grasp the likelihood of a chance. If you look into how big the universe is, how old it is and how many chances it had to develop exactly what we are today it puts things into perspective.

1 person winning a jackpot that's 1:1000000000 is unlikely. When 1 billion people try to win a jackpot every day for a billion days it's extremely likely that one person will win it eventually.

Evolution already tells us how complex organisms developed over a long period of time from very simple organisms. We are the result of an unfathomable amount of failures in a trial and error experiment. You don't need intelligent design when you just try every possibility and see what sticks. That method isn't fast but it always works. That's why we adopted it in computers today.

Yes you can, that's why you have the division between necessary and contingent beings.

Yes, mostly because I believe in the existence of a multiverse, and by virtue of what I believe, I believe there is a god...

Is this the cosmological argument?