Well I found my Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary copyright 1977 Atheism - 1 a: a disbelief in the existence of deity b: the doctrine that there is no deity 2 1: ungodliness wickedness
So basically, you are saying God could appear and nothing it did would constitute proof enough to convince you. Or, that nothing in science can be used to test for the existence of a higher power. In your own closed little mind, nothing could convince you because you have placed belief in the atheism religion for so long that there is no way in hell you would admit you were wrong even with proof.
You are placing belief that the being is actually physical. Does love exist ? Can science measure it to prove that it does ? Or can it only take samples of others accounts of love existing ?
Here's the problem: You believe in some sort of undefined higher power. Sort of useless in the context of any argument. Without a definition of its attributes, abilities or historical documentation, even you wouldn't recognize it with any certainty let alone be able to test for authentication. You'd have no grounds to do so. It's just a conceptual deity in your mind with no apparent substance. As for the rest of the world's religions, even new age religions, all of their higher powers are defined to the point that they would recognize them if they saw them and more importantly, would have a set of rudimentary tests in order to confirm its identity. Just pick your religion. Jesus, Jehovah, Allah, African tribal gods, pagan nature gods, Wiccan deities, Hindu deities, etc. all very distinct and all capable of being tested for authenticity were they to manifest themselves. Since you wouldn't be able to recognize your own conjured up yet undefined higher power, the strong agnostic argument would aptly apply. That argument being: the belief that it is impossible for humans to know whether or not any deities exist. And how could they if there are undefined and can be no litmus test applied. Anyway, you could argue that some highly advance alien could pose as one of the gods or some new god(s), but we could find ways of testing them based on their own claims of ability and power.
It's pretty good. No arguments. But it's best not to stick to dictionary definitions too rigidly but to examine what atheism really is. There are also different types of atheists just like there's different types of theists. A case, albeit a difficult one, is that we all start off as atheists as we're all born without a belief in god(s) but either later sometimes develop one or are more commonly, indoctrinated into one. But because atheism is really a conclusion based on all the evidence to date, or more succinctly, lack of evidence to date, to say that we're all born atheist is a stretch of what really defines an atheist. That's what makes atheism an active, conscious and reasoned denial of the existence of deities. It's not simply to be without a belief in gods as some dictionary's define it. Considering that if one believe in one deity but not the other supposed deities, then one is actively, consciously and "logically" denying the existence of the other gods. That person is an atheist as far as those gods are concerned, but a theist as far as the god(s) that person believes in are concerned. One disbelieve in those other deities. However, if one has never been exposed to the assertions of the other gods and only know the god that one believe in, then and only then is that person purely and unequivocally a theist.
god == perfection ... apparently, atheists discount the concept, while fundamentalists pervert it for their own gains so, does god exist... mine certainly do
Not necessarily. An invisible being could do miracles too. Claude Rains did some pretty funky things in the movies; I'd expect more from an invisible God. Actually, the love analogy is one I have considered. Is love a real entity, or do people BELIEVE in love and therefore have a belief that makes them do certain things? Is love a delusion? Is GOD a delusion? Hmmm. Both are based on feelings, not reason. Belief in God and belief in love are powerful forces, among the most powerful in existence. One can stop believing in both. Belief in both help may help make people happy and may help give meaning to the individual outside the individual. There is a good side to that, and also a bad side: delusion and dependency. Some of the most ardent former theists become the most ardent atheists. Any one remember Sam Kinison? Likewise, the couples that have the most awful divorces were probably both totally, hopelessly in love. I am going nowhere in this, because, ultimately, one can prove with reason neither the existence of love nor of God. But BELIEF in both is irrefutable.