Yes I pick on all religions.

[Chas]

Coupled with the lack of evidence, which you say should not even exist, and the only conclusion a critical thinker could come to is that there is no justification to believe.

And yet many "critical thinkers" are theists of some sort or the other. Whatever grounds we feel have not been justifiably met, they disagree, or the grounds by which we are expecting justification to arise are in different regions altogether. Or metaphysical naturalism itself cannot meet its own burden of proof and therefore the two alternatives each become one of preference rather than verification.

Please provide evidence that any of them are critical thinkers.

---

I think this conversation might have a chance of going somewhere if you stopped caricaturing Frodo's position with obvious straw-men, Brian. God as conceived by "critical thinkers" is not as simple as an "invisible pink unicorn" or the "invisible sky hero theory." It's about as silly to say that as it is to characterize the theory of evolution as predicting and failing to produce crocoducks.

Sorry, no. There is precisely as much reason to believe in Poseidon or Thor or pink unicorns. Still waiting to hear about these alleged 'critical thinkers'.

---

Prove I'm right about what?

I am not making any claims that need to be supported. I take the position that the claim (the existence of a god) has not met its burden of proof. Therefore there is no justification to believe it is true.

I do not make the claim, with absolute certainty, that a god does not exist.

A defendant in a court of law does not have to prove they are innocent, only that they are not guilty.

I argue about it because there are real world, very negative consequences for theistic belief. I also happen to like to debate.

Yes I agree, I don't have any beliefs in any god, but I do feel there is a collective universal consciousness that we are all one in. This idea of a universal consciousness is something I cannot prove also, even though I think quantum comes close to explaining it. But my whole point was that we shouldn't go out of our way and arrogantly pick on those who do have a belief in a god, that is of if they don't come to you first, but also I agree it can be fun just debating if that is what it really is.

I'm an equal opportunity picker-onner. Any unevidenced belief is fair game for ridicule, like "collective universal consciousness".