There is evidence for God that does not exist for unicorns, that isn't empirical.
I've asked for this before and you've been uncooperative. It's never too late to change.
We naturally expect that a universe should have either 0 gods, 1 god, or an infinite number of gods. It would seem very strange, arbitrary, if it had say, 389 gods. Why 389? Why 657? Why 44? But 0, 1, and infinity appear simple and natural.
There is a mathematical way of quantifying complexity actually, called Kolmogorov complexity, and 1 god is far more complex than no gods.
The claim in this topic has been that empirical proof cannot exist, because empirical evidence is not sufficient to constitute proof, so I'd say your statement is false.
What a great way of countering a statement. Just by contradicting it and not actually citing any specific objections.
Religion should be based on a choice, ideally. Everything should be based on choices, actually.....never on environmental influences.
What does this mean? What the hell is the difference between a choice and an environmental influence and why is choice desirable? Furthermore, you haven't actually acknowledged my argument that religion actually IS based on empirical observation: That is, people conclude that aspects of religion are true not because they received unquestionable nonempirical proof from the heavens, but that they received unreliaible empirical influences from their upbringing.
--
Eh? You Serious? Easy Mode? How Disgusting!
Only Elementary School Kids should play on Easy Mode.