Disproving Odin - An Experiment in arguing with a theist with Theist logic

[Jenny A]

The standard here is to prove Odin does not exist, not just to demonstrate that he is highly unlikely.  

No it isn't, the idea is to show if there more evidence for the existence of Odin or against the existence of Odin.

How about this... I present evidence that Odin exists and you present evidence that Odin does not exist and we'll judge based on who has the most evidence for and against.

Do you guys believe that more evidence for Odin has been presented than against?

If so, what evidence has been produced for the existence of Odin?

No I don't think there is more evidence for Odin than against him. The evidence for him is tradition, The Prose Edda, that many people did believe in him, and that some still do. Temples, place names, alters, jewelry etc. all attest to that faith. The evidence against him is primarily the lack of evidence for him and that his legends violate what we know about the physical world. So Odin is extraordinarily unlikely. But he is not absolutely disproven. That's the problem with trying to prove a negative.

That is is point of this thread. Your arguments for Odin's nonexistence are essentially the same as atheists arguments for god's nonexistence. They are very potent arguments whether applied to God or Odin. Like the Edda Prose's descriptions of Odin and creation, the Bible's description of him and our world violates what we know about the physical world, it too is based on earlier legends. Additionally, much of it violates what we know about history.

But the primary reason God is so unlikely is his lack of demonstrable interaction with the world. That's an Odin problem too, though one you haven't mentioned.

I can't disprove either one, but I can say both are ridiculously unlikely. It's hard to even rank them as to which is more unlikely.