Atheism and the existence of peanut butter

[R00tKiT]

I'm unconcerned.  I think that the vast weight of evidence to that effect allays any rational doubt.  

The vast weight of evidence you're referring to only implies correlation. And I am not denying that people's beliefs are correlated with their parents'. 

Any claim about anything made with reference to it's appearance is an empirical premise, as empirical premises refer to what we can observe.  

The world either looks designed, or it does not look designed.  You can either use an empirical premise, or deny any possibility of an empirical premise - but to do both simultaneously is self defeating, thus..incoherent.  

I didn't deny anywhere the possibility of an empirical premise, I denied the possibility of empirical tests/investigations about a supernatural entity. This is not the same thing.

This is just utter nonsense.  Historians know more about her than they know about anyone who lived prior to her or anyone who lived for several centuries after her.  

Historians knowing things is not an argument for existence. Any actual argument to prove that Joan of Arc existed would be inductive, you can try.