Because we are human and we know what humans do. We don't have the benefit of being a god when setting expectations.
No. We're not dogs, but we have a pretty good general idea of what dogs do. That gives us the ability to make predictions about dog behavior. Same for any other thing. So, one more time, why is it so hard to make predictions about a god? The answer lies in why
we are able to make predictions about dogs.
I didn't say God couldn't be defined.
I didn't say you did. You spoke in generalities. "If you cannot define something
..." So did I. "If you cannot define something
I want to know what process leads other people to say there is no evidence.
That strikes me as quite a change in direction. If not, then you have not explained your question very well from the start.
It seems those that make those claims can't even define what it is they don't believe in. They certainly couldn't claim there is no evidence when they've carried out no experiments or at best they can say is there is no evidence for God as they define him.
Wait a minute. You ask about hypothesis testing. Now you are saying the whole point of your question was to find out why atheists say there is no evidence for god. This sounds like a complete change in the conversation. So, either you are radically changing the subject, or you have not communicated your point throughout this conversation.
The same could be said about every discovery that has ever took place if you go back in history.
No. The same cannot be said of every discovery. what the heck are you even talking about? We are clearly not on the same page here. Please start over.