The latest comment prompted a thought that applies to most of the comments: people with differing opinions about what constitutes "valid evidence" will never see eye-to-eye. I view the universe's mind-boggling "fine-tuning," the personal experiences of billions of people of faith, and the inability to test the supernatural as "valid evidence" (at the least) for the conclusion that we can't be certain of anything regarding the divine except being uncertain (so please stop writing articles telling others there's absolutely, positively no deity, full stop). Others view the same things as invalid evidence and thus reach different conclusions. That's fine. But the comments, I dare say, prove my article's thesis.