While everything that exists appears cold and pointless to the non-prejudiced, it's hard to make definitive statements at a time when physicists have no adeqate explanation for the world we observe that does not involve a serious load of personal theories and mumbo-jumbo. The situation doesn't seem very different in neuroscience and the explanation of mental experience. Yet, i tend to be on the agnostic atheist side. This is a rather sad world full of cruelty and injustice, and while i have no adequate explanation at all of anything that exists in nature and can only say that something appears to be happening, i see little reason to praise a deity that can supposedly make such a terrible mess. Agnostic atheism seems to be the most sensible stance, if not the only sensible one at all(and one must take a side esp. if one is raising children and they start asking the questions)
Agnostic atheist is a contradiction in terms. Either you have no opinion on the issue or you believe there is no God. Likewise calling someone "unprejudiced" for believing everything that exists appears cold and pointless is a contradiction.