No one is disregarding anything.
If you admit that you do not know, then you can not say "It was not God" because you don't know.
See how foolish that is?
see how foolish this is?
Following your rules, you also can't say that it was not: Zeus, Thor, Loki, Coyote, Lord Krishna, or The Great Dragon Overlord. Or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Or any other god that has ever been proposed or ever will be proposed, or thought up by some acid-tripping Rocky Mountain High camper gathering psychedelic mushrooms.
In other words, even if you could determine that a
god is actually responsible (which you
clearly can't, and not for a lack of posts supposedly trying), that still doesn't prove your
god. If you're going to use this argument, you have more to prove than you seem to think. And after all this time here (supporting evidence - we've recently seen that you are learning to spot logical fallacies, finally) you're well aware of this.
Are you ever going to bring a new tactic to the discussion?
I do not insist that a
"god" is impossible. I do
say that of all the gods described so far, none have any evidence of existing. I grant the slim possibility of a deist entity, because I am not arrogant enough to insist that I know
things I do not, in fact, know
An interventionist god of the type you insist exists? Nope, not a shred of evidence, thus your empty assertions of it's existence are just that.Edit: misplaced "s"