Sorry, but the contrarian approach to science (as in the markets), is often a reliable indicator. Thomas Kuhn, Harvard historian and physics instructor, destroyed the icon that you are placing before us in the early 60's. He described how institutional science worked. Establishment science, which he called "normal science", operated on the most and agreeable theory of a given era. But as anomalies in the theory appeared in increasing numbers, the establishment became defensive and insecure. And, always, the new theory is not accepted until the Old Guard can be slowly vanquished. Imo this is exactly what is happening currently in science with the great number of alternative physicists and cosmologists that are rising to prominence. The diehard materialist movement that was crowned the new King of All Science at the Darwin Centennial in 1959 is now experiencing anomalies and does not want to share its throne.... To quote Hoyle: "Explosions do not usually lead to well-ordered situations" and "a commonsense interpretation of the facts suggest that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as chemistry and biology." Again, Hoyle was far from a traditional theist, but he was also far from a traditional materialist.
Maybe only God himself could answer your this question, therefore you'd better seek him first and then ask him directly!
"lack of evidence" or "evidence to the contrary" , or both.. whatever semantical games you wish to play ..the burden of proof remains on the claimant. you wish to rationally assert that god exists then you'd better back it up otherwise you're just another crank. our mere existence does not presuppose a god creator, you will have to do a lot better than that. if i claim the existence of fornons without adequate substantiation my position is irrational, and the rational position for you is disbelief, and you are under no requirement to produce "evidence to the contrary". "One might be asked "How can you prove that a god does not exist?" One can only reply that it is scarcely necessary to disprove what has never been proved." --- David A. Spitz
"Suppose we've chosen the wrong god. Every time we go to church we're just making him madder and madder." --- Homer Simpson
"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." --- Carl Sagan
My own perception is there is only one universal God (disregarding any labels) for all human beings (personally I do not hold an opinion for there is any difference between whatever believers, believers-to-be, and unbelievers of God). I go to church is simply to reinforce me the spirit of Jesus. Probably, Simpson's observation is now a little bit outdated, I'm afraid (no offense!)!
what a bunch of crap. not only can you not prove any god exists, now you're claiming there is 1 and not more. you are in no position what-so-ever to claim you know a god does or does not exist, what it is, or how many there are if they exist. can we please stop the bullshit.
So you are in a position to command anyone whether: "you are in no position what-so-ever to claim you know a god does or does not exist, what it is, or how many there are if they exist."!?
duh! it's freaking obvious we don't have anywhere near all the answers. admit this is reality and stop making ridiculous claims--this goes to all religious people.