i've always had a problem with educated ppl believing in the god myth. some of them sincerely seem to. can't say i envy them. how will they react when they or a loved one is stricken by a horrible disease?

Yes, the brain is more than chemical reactions (electromagnetic force). It is also the strong & weak nuclear force with gravity; just like everything else.

Yes, even science is created. So is your car and everything about it that makes it work. You can also look at how many years your car has been evolving and see exactly in what ways it has evolved.

I was in an intimate relationship with a **born-again" Christian … I suggested to her to think of evolution as a divine invention.

Georges Lemaître, (1894-1966), Belgian cosmologist, Catholic priest, and father of the Big Bang theory. [amnh.org]

“Bottom line (argument) that the human brain is more than chemical interactions. But my friend did a lot of drugs back in the hippie days.”

What I would say is that I lean toward thinking that conscious awareness is more than chemical interactions in the brain. And I was never a hippie and didn’t do drugs.

For the most part I really don't care about the "beliefs" of others. As long as it doesn't impede their work or their contributions. I have a good deal of friends whom of which are "believers", yet do great work with helping others and not forcing their religion or other on them as well. In fact some great minds in the Science fields for example Francis Collins, Kennith R Miller, and quite a few more, are themselves either religious, or at least "believers". yet have no quandaries with the Science, and their faith.

So in essence what I mean is, does it really matter?

The problem is not whether there is a God. The problem is what is ascribed to God. Heaven? Certainly not Hell! Jesus? The Bible? Those things have nothing to do with Whatever there is. How we interpret this whole thing is really left to the individual. In the meantime there is life: your life; my life and how we choose to live it. For me there is CAUSE AND EFFECT. For me there is a scheme of things. And also, "I DO NOT KNOW." I was married to a scientist who is in WHO'S WHO. He was spiritual and found true spirituality among atheists and some religious people. It was about the individual; never about the dogma.Together we saw the hypocrisy of some religious people but when their faith was based of love, tolerance excluding pompous self righteousness, we honored that. It is always the Love; never the dogma. I believe Love is the energy that binds the world.

Yes let’s look at the beautiful sunsets and flowers and cuddly animals that the creator’s hand has made.

Then let’s consider the crap that has also issued from the divine hand such as deserts with 50C+ temperatures and no water for hundreds of miles, the salt oceans that no one can drink from and the tropical reptiles that will kill you as much as look at you.

No design faults there then!

We know what we believe we know - and we all know and believe something subtley different. I have friends who have a profound belief in a god - different friends, different gods - we have open, sometimes heated, discussions, but that does not prevent friendship.

I don't believe in God . On the other hand , science is constantly changing , how it views things , too . A hundred years ago , it was impossible to reach the moon , much less actually walk on it . Fifty + years ago , they did it . We laugh at what was the medical field a hundred years ago . I still don't completely trust them , even today , and things that have happened in my own lifetime , shows me I am correct in not always trusting that they actually know what they're doing . While they have learned more , we've also been scammed more . Treatments don't always mean cure , or even improve , and in some cases , most definitely made things a whole lot worse .

When religion conflicts with science it holds no credibility.

It has none to begin with.

Sorry, but between your friend and Carl Sagan, I would say the scale definitely tilts to Sagan about as similarly as weighing a flea and an elephant. And yes, Sagan would be the elephant in the analogy.

People believe want they want to believe...or need to believe.

I think of my quote, somewhat paraphrased from its original form and context:

You may see and appreciate the beauty of the surface of the rose, but I not only see the surface beauty of the rose, I see its beauty all the way through.

~J. Richard Jacobs

The purpose here is to say that unless one is willing to dig deeper, one's appreciation of nature is at best superficial. Stopping at, "See the wonders the Big Guy in the Sky did," will never produce a rich, profound understanding of the universe in which one lives.

I think of the Douglas Adams quote:

"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"

Your "friend" is conflicted and a walking contradiction, which is fine.
Everyone gets to live with whatever delusions they please.
Most of us live with a certain level of contradiction.
Believers just live with MORE of it.