After listening to this interview: We seem to forget constantly that the burden of proof really lies with the deists/theists! We really don't claim to know: Science only seems to prove that gods existence is highly unlikely.

So how come we have to 'move heaven and earth' to disprove gods existence (or at least show the very high probability of nonexistence), whilst the pro-god argument are very, very meager indeed? It really just boils down to these two (secondhand) arguments:

1. god exists because I heard it from someone, or
2. god exists because I read it somewhere.

That really is the extend of their pathetic arguments.

Well, maybe one more...

3. god exists because my roommate and I saw jesus after a 72 hour meth binge in the arizona desert.

Nuff said. Cheers, Mulder