[quote=So Boerd]>States subjective has no bearing>Proceeds to use a subjective criteria.[/quote]

There is nothing subjective about measuring the fantastical quality of something. Here, let me show you.

There are lots of people named Susie in the world. The only barrier to my belief of your friend being named Susie is believing that someone would be named Susie and that someone is your friend. To believe that any god exists, I have to suspend my disbelief and believe that there is a being with omnipotence and potentially omniscience who created the entirety of everything, then left no evidence behind whatsoever, for no apparent reason except to ask me to worship them. This just opens up so many unanswered "why" questions. Why worship? Why do they need my worship? Why do they need me to believe them to be real without any evidence? Why this, why that, why why why~

Claiming a god exists is a fantastical claim and requires fantastical evidence, of which there is none. That is about as rational as it gets: It's down to a pure mathematical level of logic. If X value is Y, it requires Z quantity/quality of evidence. It does not get more rational than that.

[quote=So Boerd]I said a non-descript God, not the Christian God in the hypothetical. As far as the hypothetical, l asked you if you would believe in a God if every scientist on this planet said he did. You said no. I am now applying that level of evidence to your claim that bank robbers are punished. Per your standard of evidence, no volume of authoritative sources is sufficient.
[/quote]

[quote=Brovo]Apply the same logic to pretty much every other God claim on the planet for whatever fantastical things they did.[/quote]

I said no [b]if they didn't have any evidence[/b]. But then you're using a broken example anyway: The only reason every scientist on the planet would proclaim the existence of a deity is if they had significant, unbeatable, unparalleled evidence for it.

Essentially speaking: You're using a strawman example. There is no world in which every scientist would believe something without evidence. That goes completely contradictory to everything science stands for. Here, a perfect example of what I mean: If every single priest on the planet simultaneously declared there was no god, would you stop believing in god?