What makes people irrational thinkers?

[Simon Moon]

I can't speak for the OP, but for me, my athreism is a provisional position, it is not a destination.

This seems very reasonable to me, and wise.

I am completely open to being convinced a god or gods exist, but without rational, evidence based, reasoned argument, and valed and sound logic to support the case that a god exists, how would we go about figuring out if it is true, or likely to be true? As long as theists continue to fail to provide good standards of evidence to support their claims, my atheism will continue.

I think you'll see that there are two points here that can be questioned.

The first is whether or not rational evidence based reasoned argument with valid and sound logic really has failed to support the case that god exists. 

The second is whether such an approach is the only or best way to support the case that god exists. 

Believe it or not there are fascinating, non-crazy, challenging thinkers who disagree with you on both points.

What evidence, that is verifiable, demonstrable and falsifiable, have theists ever offered in support of the existence of a god? All they seem to do, is point their specific ancient texts, personal testimony, hearsay, and fallacious philosophical arguments.

If demonstrable and falsifiable evidence, reasoned argument, and valid and sound logic to demonstrate the existence of a god is not the only way or the best way, please offer another method that can reliably tell fact from fiction.

Because, the same 'methods' that theists currently use to justify their own beliefs, if applied equally to all religions and god beliefs, (and other supernatural beliefs), would have to also allow those other god beliefs to clear the same bar that their own god beliefs clear.

The "fascinating, non-crazy, challenging thinkers" you are referring to; what have they been able to offer up to demonstrate a god exists? If you are referring to arguments like: Kalam cosmological argument, ontological argument (including Plantinga's 'modal' version), teleological arguments, presuppositional arguments, etc, are either valid and/or sound.

And let me add, that I don't think theists have a rational reason to believe in gods. It is not that my bar is set too high, it's that theirs is set too low.

Or is set differently. It is hard to imagine, in our place, time, and social class, that sane people could disagree with us, but this is what questioning one's own beliefs consists of.

I never accused theists of being insane. The vast majority are sane. They just have beliefs that are unsupported by evidence, and valid and sound logic.