Well, Bill, it may well be a feeling that they have, but to claim that as evidence in any sense of the word I've ever come across would be, er, demented. Equally, Keith has a point, though he expresses it in a faux-neutral manner. There can't be evidence against because the concept has been quite deliberately formulated to put God outside scientific enquiry. Reason tells us that it's best to work within what we know but to keep on exploring, using the scientific approach allied to our imaginings. What we know is that God disobeys every law of nature so far discovered, and that he's never been seen in any sense that can be corroborated. That does not rule him out completely, but non- deluded people weigh up the odds and shrug.