Christians tell me all of the time there is evidence of God, I ask

[DetlefK]

24. As an atheist, I say in all seriousness that there is no need to prove God's existence.

We are talking about two incompatible philosophies here: belief and doubt.

Religion is rooted in belief. Belief is accepting a statement, no matter how small the evidence.
Science is rooted in doubt. Doubt is NOT accepting a statement, no matter how big the evidence.



You cannot treat the subject God with scientific means, just as you cannot treat scientific matters with religious means.

Let's ask this the other way round:
"And which spirits and daemons are responsible for these quantum-mechanics? How are they related to the spirits and daemons that govern the finite velocity of light?"

You see? Two absolutely different ways of looking at the universe. Instead of tackling the problem whether God does or doesn't exist, we should tackle the problem which of the two philosophies is correct.

There is a major difference between them:
The "philosophy of doubt" is compatible with the formulas of random sampling in statistical mathematics. The "philosophy of belief" is incompatible with this math.