It seems like they are making a contradiction in their 'logic'... they claim to absolutely know the unknowable... but then I still don't see where they say that God is only proven because he hasn't been proven false. And I'm not sure how they would or could be claiming that God is disproven because he's not been proven true, since they are claiming that he exists not that he doesn't exist (it's just that they are contradicting themselves in regards to his knowability/unknowability. They claim to absolutely know him/have proven him and yet claim that he can't be proven/known).
EvF
EvF