Wrong - did you actually bother to read my post:
'And also inconsistent double standards as those who believe in a specific god (e.g. christian god) despite the lack of evidence also reject other gods (where the evidence is just as lacking) and other phenomena (flying spaghetti monster, orbiting teapots, leprechauns) where there is similarly no credible evidence for their existence.'
You even quoted this in your reply (338), so struggling to see how you could have missed it.
This seems predicated on the idea that only things empirically known should be contemplated.
If I have encountered God then a religion where God cannot be encountered is not a better fit.
