Atheists, come on, really, stop and think for a minute..

[Mister Joy]

I just want to think about the idea of 'disproof' for a second. Atheists and theists handle the same concept (God) from a negative and a positive angle respectively. If proof is something which supports a positive claim ('God exists'), then to 'disprove' is the negative equivalent; it's simply to discredit or in some way take away that proof. To expect a negative to do anything other than this is absurd - it doesn't need to. A claim like 'God does not exist' refutes its own subject, so what is it supposed to supply proof for, exactly? To disprove is ultimately to point out that the opposition's evidence is invalid, which, in itself, doesn't always require evidence of its own. In this case, for instance, by simply pointing out that there is no evidence supporting a Christian God, you are logically disproving his existence. It cannot be absolute, certainly, as absolute 'truth' is an asymptote and, as Psalm23 points out, we've only scratched the surface of the potential data, but it is as absolute as any positive 'proof'.

Just as, if I were to accuse Psalm23 of murder in the first degree, you couldn't logically take me seriously. There would be no weight to that claim whatsoever as to refute it all you would need to say is "Oi Mr. Joy, you rampant SPAZ, where's your evidence?" I could say that you are being ridiculous for dismissing my claims because you don't even know Psalm23! How can you tell me that he's not a murderer when you've never even met him/her?

Now, Psalm23, if you can explain to me, reasonably, why I should believe in God yet not believe you are a murderer, without any double-standards, I'll be mightily impressed.