Atheist vs Pantheist

[JonDarbyXIII]

First, welcome.

Next, I have a hard time accepting your assertion that there is a ton of science that supports theism. As far as I've seen the hard sciences show nothing that aligns with theism. Now, I don't discount the soft sciences--I'm quite fond of psychology--but waxing philosophical only gets us so far in dealing with the unknown. Many things can be postulated through philosophy, psychology, etc., but this doesn't always translate 1:1 into existence.

Atheism is not as you say an unscientific philosophy. A common theme you will see throughout this forum is that the whole basis for our position is that 1) there is nothing we have seen which would indicate that there is a god and 2) most of what we do see in the world would actually be what you would expect if there weren't a god. You say there is science that supports theism. We simply say, "show your work."

The burden of proof, therefore, is not on us because we are simply saying that we see no reason to believe the god hypothesis without evidence. You are correct that we don’t have the technology to rule out the human spirit. However, we also don't have the technology to rule out Bertrand Russel's tiny, orbiting teapot. Saying that you can't prove that there are pink-bearded fairies does not mean that there are, in fact, pink-bearded fairies.