[Future's Origin]

Hmm, I've heard this anti soul argument so many times before and I really don't understand how this disproves a soul.

You went wrong, IMO, in your first step where "we" (and this is who? you and your buddies or what you have gathered the proverbial "we" believes about souls?) define what a soul is. I don't think this definition "we've" come up with actually describes what the average soul beleiving person thinks.

Why do souls need to be bound in an earthly body to exist? What spiritual information did you read that leads you to beleive people who beleive in souls feel this way? Why would there need to be a soul repository? The entire idea of a soul is that it is some force or energy that does not need the physical to exist. There is no container, human, repository or otherwise required. Why does the uncertainty of when a soul enters a body negate the existance of a soul? How does not knowing where/how/by whom souls are made mean they can't exist?

Again, the entire concept of the soul is that it is beyond the physical realm. Proving or disproving it by using logic and scientific reasoning will always result in disproving the existance of the soul. Any evidence to prove that a soul exists cannot yet be officially verified, quantified and given Humanity's Official Seal of Existance and therefore doesn't count. This is the same with anything paranormal or spiritual. It doesn't work in a lab. But spiritual, soulful experiences happen to people. Perhaps if it happened to you, you'd have a better idea of what all these crazy, irrational, logic-hating people are talking about. When something happens to you that can't be logically verified, it really doesn't change the fact that it happened to you. I believe in a soul because of some of these things. I'm not afraid of death. And I'm not afraid of being wrong and fading out of existance.

The population argument is really common and is flawed. It mainly assumes that a) the population of souls is static, b) only humans have souls, c) souls must go directly from body 1 to body 2, and d) these bodies are all on this planet Earth. Since the human population is ever increasing, there are not souls. If you are seriously evaluating if the soul exists, you need to be more open minded. If animals have souls, this whole population thing is pretty much impossible to calculate. If you factor in the idea that there is life on other planets where souls can incarnate, the number of human beings on the planet is completely irrelevant.

If you are looking to disprove the soul's existance, which you appear to be, you've gone about it in an effective way. Narrowly defining the characteristics of a soul and then using narrow minded logic to disprove these innaccurate characteristics. This may provide you with what you are looking for personally, but this line of thinking will not actually disprove something to a person who is already has an open mind to the concept of a soul, spirituality, and the idea that there are things that exist that we do not yet have the ability to completely verify or understand. I'm not trying to degrade you or call you a narrow minded individual. I'm just saying it appears that you are not objectively and openly evaluating the possibility of a soul's existance, which would require a different mindset than the one you were using when you approached this question.