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

[LadyForCamus]

Actually Marilyn Hickey claimed she saw and I quote:

Marilyn Hickey: Here I am on a platform facing this man and had the most unusual experience. I don't know how to describe it but it was like a wheel within a wheel lower on the ground and I could see it and as it turned it went whoosh.. whoosh.. I could hear it and this man is saying to me you're not from here you're from Denver Colorado, you're from a wooded area and you can't have a baby.

Interviewer: And he had never met you?

Marilyn Hickey: Never, ever

I haven’t the faintest idea why you think this is evidence of god. We’ve already established that people in the audience claimed they saw a light; a light penis, a light wheel; its distinguishing features (shape, size, color, etc.) are largely irrelevant. Also, she absolutely could have been lying about not knowing him.  This sort of thing happens all the time, and evidence of that has been provided to you in this very thread.

I have never seen evidence that a god exists, and if he does, no one has given me a thorough and specific explanation for what he’s made of, how he performs, or how he interacts with the physical world.  On the other hand, I know for a fact that religious hoaxes and fake “miraculous” healings occur.  I know for a fact that humans orchestrate such hoaxes. I know for a fact that coincidences happen, and that the power of suggestion under the right conditions can cause people to see, hear, and act on things that aren’t actually there. Demonstrable evidence of these facts exists and is accessible.

So, the relevant question becomes:

Which explanation is more reasonable and probable in this particular scenario? The explanation that invokes the inexplicable magic of an unevidenced god, or the explanation that points to demonstrable facts?
 
You have some people who said they saw a light, and a picture of some light. That’s all you’ve ever had, and that’s all your ever going to have with this particular event.  Reaching for anything more than that is obvious confirmation bias, and total abandonment of critical thinking.