Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?

[RoadRunner79]

An atheist's tendency in this situation; I have observed, is to deny, and claim the observer as mistaken, crazy or something similar (or if unable to deny, then well there must be a naturalistic cause (science will figure it out someday).  Here too, I think that often, it may be better to just say I don't know.  Not that there can't be reasons for these answers, but they are a claim that needs to be supported.

I agree with much of your post, but disagree with this. Firstly, atheists aren't robots who all share the same programming, and I know plenty who are dead-certain that UFOs are piloted by beings from other worlds, or that humans have mental powers such as ESP or PK or whatever.

Secondly, the fact is that mistakes of observation and forms of insanity which impart hallucinations are facts. They happen regularly, daily. The idea that those explanations are less likely than that of an all-powerful invisible guy in heaven is hogwash, and the rational mind knows this.

To your first point:  I agree - I'm not trying to lump all atheist together.  I hope that others are affording theist the same consideration.

To your Second Point:   I agree, we can make mistakes of observation or memory, but I think there is a problem if you are explaining things away in this manner, just because it conflicts with your worldview.  These types of mistakes have limits, and I think the evaluation of them are going to depend on the details.    Concerning insanity and hallucinations.   First how are you determining your probability for God?  Additionally... without other reasons what do you think that the likelihood of a normally healthy person who doesn't have a history of hallucinations or similar defects, just happens to have one, right when it conflicts with your world view.  It doesn't seem quite right, to be able to assume on this alone (also who decides what worldview we use).  Now normally I would say that we can know reality through others confirming that what we see or experience is true.  That if others are seeing something that no one else does, then it is reasonable to reduce the explanation down to the common factor.  However this requires others to be present at the time, and give their report of what was not seen. I may ahve to give this a little more thought and do some research.  I don't really understand the extents of this type of mental illness and it's limits.