Question for freethinkers

[tackattack]

I didn't sidestep anything. You still refuse to answer my questions, but I'll happily answer yours.

i)With my limited knowledge and my human perspective I would have averted it
ii) There are lots of reasons to this. You no doubt answer it with, because he doesn't exist, because you see no justifiable reason for their death.

Here's a few -
a)Someone had to pay the consequence for human action. From a life after death perspective, why not take the innocents so they can be spared hell and blame so that the living guilty could atone.
b)What would make the more impact on a community to learn their lesson? they already realized it could be a disaster, but apparently didn't care enough to protect their children.
c)He only interferes with human choice and desires and not natural laws or consequences
d)He's doesn't see death (especially of innocents) as inheritly bad and would rather have the innocents in heaven with him then have another generation of people that ignored him and common sense.
e)There could have been the next Jeffrey Dahmer in that school house, and he wanted to clear him away while he was still innocent.
I could come up with more probably if you like or even
f)He's apathetic

I'm sure I could come up with more, but I don't really know his reasons and this is all conjecture that I can see from my finite little perspective. None of it is evidence against God. You can't take someone's/something's inaction and use it to disprove their existence. I've never eaten an ugli fruit, they must not exist right... That's my main problem with the P.O.E. is that it's using instances of inaction and trussing up a moral delima with it and using it as evidence of the unlikeliness of God's existence.