Strong Atheism starts from faith

[theVOID]

You're going into bullshit territory VOID. Answer your question why? You seem to want to change subject entirely.

1) false assumption
2) based on Q1 so void
3) ditto
4) ditto

Back to the actual question... how do you conclude that there should be evidence for God?

Response to 1):

THEN PROVIDE YOUR LOGICAL OR EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE AND SHOW THE REASONING BEING USED TO REACH YOUR CONCLUSION.


2) There are many claims made by many believers that manifest in reality in a way that would be measurable, for example:

If prayer works then it's effect will be measurable and would give strong suggestive evidence to support the idea of God, you would actually have a falsifiable hypothesis! That's things religions need more of.

A test has been done with a large sample size to test just this. The study was run by both Christian and secular scientists a few years ago, to test if their was a positive correlation between prayer and recovery greater than that of the control group's placebo.

All of the people in the test were devout believers, regular church attendees and all had the same type of diabetes, there were several hundred of them split into 2 groups, one group was prayed for and one group was not.

The prayers were conducted by faith healers from various traditions with many testimonies recommending them, they were all very well known. They prayed for the first group only, each healer said a prayer for each patient, then the whole group prayed for the patients one at a time. The second group got given a show, they were put through the same process with hired fakes doing the prayer - this is the control group.

The tests happened twice a month for 6 months.

Over the course of the study and in the 18 months following the tests, they were all regularly monitored to see if there was any change in the bodies natural insulin levels as well as other factors related to the disease.

There was no difference between the two groups, the results were on average lower than expected deviation by chance, and it was a negative deviation.

It was good science testing an actual falsifiable hypothesis, the tests failed but at least it was done, ad it was only one of many very similar studies that has been done and failed.