By far the most attacked person around this thread is me.

I'm impressed. I'd rather taken it that you were hard wired to insist on evidence for extraordinary claims.

Still, I must admit I haven't read all the 1,500 + posts, so I've presumably missed the attacks. But it strikes me that no one has been challenging your views (I won't call them beliefs, in deference to how you define that word), just defending their right to have different views.

As for the suggestion of repetition on your part, perhaps the main example is your constant trope that evidence has to be the only basis for any decision as to what to accept as true, and to demand such evidence. You just won't accept the response you have been given, which essentially is that religious belief is essentially a matter of making a decision, rather than of evidence. Demands for "scientific evidence" just aren't relevant. It's analogous to aesthetic judgements - scientific evidence just don't have any connection with such matters, and asking for them time and time again would be pointless.