God's Existence Is Personal Opinion

Just as an opener to the final round, I want to distinguish between two things - opinion and fact. Opinions are things that people hold strongly, and tend to hold onto in the face of contradicting evidence. They also tend to seek out evidence that strengthens their opinion (confirmation bias). Facts on the other hand, are fleeting. People have no attachment to facts whatsoever. If it is raining, then you acknowledge right away that it is the case. If it stops raining, you acknowledge it right away. Lets not spend too much time on this I think it's clear.---If I claim to have had a supernatural experience, then I don't expect you to believe me unless I can replicate the experience for you somehow. Likewise if you claim to have a supernatural experience, I, as a skeptic, will not be believing you unless I see it for myself in one way or another. No hard feelings.That's the topic I really want to address though, the idea of "hard feelings". Religious belief is a difficult thing for people to express or convey. It's a bit materialistic and nihilistic to just say "there's no evidence for god, when we die that's it". However this is my belief. I don't expect you to understand it. Likewise I don't pretend to understand the experience of people who have had "God reveal Himself to them". Who am I to judge? If we try to judge each other's experiences, we will get nowhere. Especially on a debate site, trying to debate religious belief. There's nothing to debate; one person has their belief, another person has their own belief, another person has their own belief, and that's the way it is. You can't try and debate that someone who is a Muslim is actually an atheist, or that someone who is an atheist is actually a Christian, that's just preposterous. But that's EXACTLY what people try to do when they say "your belief is wrong and this other belief is better and you just don't realize the truth". Each person is entitled to their own personal opinion. God's existence remains a personal opinion either way, and I vouch for the right for people to have their harmless personal opinions excluded from criticism.---Science has a certain level of subjectivity, but I fear you skipped a step. When it comes to interpreting the evidence and CREATING the theory in the first place, there is certainly subjectivity. Interpreting the theory is not subjective though. The models or formulas are very concrete and we can simulate a scenario given a set of inputs on a computer. My question for you, is this: "Is the goal of science to be objective or subjective in reaching conclusions?". ***In other words, is "f = ma" a form of art or a formula?The scientists out there that don't believe in evolution are a red herring to this debate. Abiogenesis is also a red herring. It's one of the things that science can't answer currently, so of course there's debate and different opinions on it, which is great I hope someday someone figures out exactly how it happened. I would rather draw your attention to things that science has determned for a fact, like Newton's laws or Ohm's law, or the structure of the atom, and that there is NO room for subjectivity in these models. There's no debate on what a volt is, or what a force is, or what mass is, or how big an atom is.---If I met the president of Iraq, how does that affect you in any way? You'd only care if it were true or not if it affected you somehow. Which it doesn't.---Some questions I would like to ask you to answer:(Q1) Are there people who concede God exists?(Q2) Are there people who concede God does not exist?I will now add a third and fourth question:(Q3) If someone questions whether or not God exists, does faith or materialistic, numerical, empirical data convince them that God exists?(Q4) If someone questions whether or not God exists, why do some people end up saying "no"?Since this is the final round I can't respond to the your answers, but your answers should make it clear that there is no way to reach a consensus on God's existence.---If god's existence were not something that is a matter of personal opinion, then there should be some way for everyone to agree on whether or not god exists. It should be apparent from the thousands upon thousands of "does god exist" debates involving people like Richard Dawkins or Sam Harris or whoever, that no one is coming to a consensus on the issue. This means the issue should be left to an individual's discretion. God's existence should be something people decide on for themselves, not something forced down their throat by someone with a different personal belief. If you say "there is a God", does that harm me in any way? No. So why should I care? Why should you care if I say "there isn't one"? Unless you can provide a reason for either of us to care, then my point is clear - God's existence is a personal matter. And personal matters are between the people involved, and that's it. Most people on the internet are not affected in any way shape or form, by other people's beliefs on the internet.As a final word, I'd like to end on this - if we continuously bicker about whose religion is better, we'll end up frustrated and no further ahead of where we started.And of course thank you for engaging in the debate.