Nothing but bad “evidence”, certainly no objective evidence of any kind, and poorly reasoned irrational arguments. I mean, if someone had seen “good” evidence then likely their doubts would have been set aside.
Well what criteria should I adopt for belief, if you can find one more likely to ascertain the truth of a claim then please present it. After all one might as easily ask who made theists the best authority for what beliefs they choose to hold and not hold? So that’s a rather bizarre question don’t you think? I want to believe only things that are true, and I set a standard for credulity that best achieves that, which is that sufficient objective evidence be demonstrated for a claim. Since I have seen no objective evidence or rational argument that any deity or anything supernatural is even possible, I remain unconvinced.
I think perhaps that question might better be aimed at theists, but lets take a look at the definition of existence:
Existence
noun
- the fact or state of living or having objective reality.
Now when someone can offer some objective evidence that any deity is real I shall evaluate it as best I am able.
What if scales are characteristic of mermaids? The question has no relevance or meaning unless you can demonstrate a deity is even possible.
Just more wild speculation about something I see no objective evidence exists or is even possible, how does this provide any data or evidence to examine, it’s an appeal to mystery at best.
Straw man, the characteristics are not assigned by atheists, but by theists. All atheists may do is examine such claims to see if they are rational, or supported by any objective evidence.
Most atheists I have encountered do not claim no deities exist, they merely withhold belief from those who claim they do, and for the reasons stated. An agnostic by definition can make no claims about the nature or existence of a deity, they can however disbelieve claims that such a thing exists, and they can point out irrational claims that violate principles of logic made by those who believe deities exist. I am an atheist about all deities, and when concepts of deities are presented that are unfalsifiable I am also an agnostic, the two are not mutually exclusive.
You question predicates that such a deity exists or is possible, based on what? That the claims about deities often are irrational, is unlikely to be disputed by any atheists here. Do imaginary things generally have to conform to the principles of logic in your experience?
Disingenuous, since atheism doesn’t disbelieve that people imagine deities, only that they don’t exist, and for that something has to be either living or have objective reality. Since that is what the word means.
So do unicorns, and mermaids, and Batman and Superman, what’s your point?