Does this test also prove that burned toast does not exist?
No but it does mean that if you are out in the desert, miles from anywhere, smelling burned toast does not mean there is a kitchen around.
If it was god, surely he could think of some easier way to experience him beyond a large seizure? Doesn’t seem worth the trouble. 
In any case, I imagine animals can have all the same brain malfunctions we can - it’s chalking it up to god that’s unique. No other species has come up with the idea as far as I know.
Okay, I have a question that I hope will clear up some of the bad feelings I’m percieving amongst the theists.
Atheists: Suppose those on the other side can’t provide evidence. So what? What does that mean to you, to them, and (perhaps most importantly) your opinion of them and their intelligence/honor/whatever? Must any person with a spiritual belief defend their beliefs with evidence, at risk of being thought of as a person of lesser intelligence or rational ability?
(Note that I know the answers, I think, from previous threads. As I said, I’m hoping that a direct answer to this will clear up a little of the bad blood I’m seeing here.)
For me, none of this has anything to do with intelligence or honor. I do think it calls for a change in tone: if you have an opinion you can’t support at all, maybe you should be a little more accepting of other people’s opinions. (This is, of course, not something that applies to all theists.)
I don’t think any ideas should be exempt from evidence, it doesn’t matter what they’re about.
Only in the specific category of “religious belief” does it make a person irrational. There are people I consider the smartest, hard working, honest, and friendly people I know, but when it comes to the specific category of religion, I think they abandon their rationality.
This sounds so childish as to be laughable. The only fucking thing in the universe that’s non-physical. We have no evidence whatsoever of its existence, yet this whole group of people have been sucked into a mass-hypnotic state and are certain its out there somewhere, waiting to take us to the promised land.
What’s wrong with “I don’t know!”? Lots of things in this world were unknown for millions of years, and then an answer was discovered. Is it so difficult to just wait and hope that a reason to believe in an all-loving (or if it’s your cup o’ tea, all-hating) superpower will be discovered? Is the world so horrible a place without it?
Speaking for myself, I am an atheist after a long spiritual search proved fruitless. Why do you suppose this god force was never revealed to me. My mind was open, I was receptive. Why did it pick you and not me?
As it reads, this is a curious statement. Do you mean that theists use of evidence puts them at risk of being considered of lesser intelligence? Or do you mean the opposite.
Theists who believe despite the lack of evidence, and who admit this, are the ones who get my respect. These are usually the theists who admit they may be wrong, and are willing to let others find their own way. The ones I do not respect are those who fail to acknowledge that their evidence is neither nonexistent or flawed, and who are so certain of their position that they wish to force others into it.
Look, if a guy says his girlfriend is the most beautiful creature in the world, we’ll all just smile. If he he puts her picture on hotornot, and she winds up with a dreadful score, but he invents all sorts of conspiracy claims to explain it away, we’ll have some doubts as to his sanity.