When I'm in the mood, I sometimes wander around the intertubes looking for arguments, particularly of the theism/atheism variety.
An interesting one is going on at moment over at Atheism Analyzed. Stan has written a really interesting multi-part series of posts on why rejection of deism on the basis of scientific argument is irrational.
I've been meaning to write a post on this myself (with, as it happens, very similar arguments but different conclusions) so I jumped on in. My comments are on #4 in the series, although I'm mainly referring to the argument in #2.
It's all a bit wordy and analytical, but I know some of my readers are into that sort of thing. So feel free to jump on in too.