Atheism is more rational then Theism

Again Thank you Frackjack for your response. Now I will attempt to address Con's rebuttals. Con states, "So, even you prove that a god exists,". I never said anything that it is possible to prove God. What I was basically saying is that the KCA proves god as much as it proves the FSM, but the FSM is treated as nonexistant. Firstly the FSM is not defined as having the same attributes as God, such as omnipotence and being an absolute infinite being, If the FSM is also given the same attributes as God then the FSM would also be God, because God by definition has all these attributes that make him necessary to be God. For instance, I stated in my last round that God must be defined in the very least as Supreme, Supreme means first in rank, or highest in authority, if God is not first in rank then he is not God, because there would be another with a higher position who automatically claims the title of God, he would then be the highest authority. Also in my definition of God in my last round, and my analogy of the sun and the sunshine being the same in chemical qualitative attributes, I state they are yet different things entirely , I state that God is infinite and all energy is Gods, either directly or indirectly, and He can manifest in innumerable different entities or objects if he so pleases, being self sufficient in power, so manifesting into a FSM is not an impossible feat for God if he chooses to create the FSM using his separated energy, he can. Not that he has, but if he chooses he could. Also my opponent has tuned this debate into a proving God exists debate, by asking for proof of God, I am of the opinion that God's existence can not be proven, but God can be reasoned to exist by using strong supporting arguments for Gods existence, Not proof, but strong supporting arguments. There is a difference between the two, a theist does not have proof God exists, but instead a theist has faith. It is my opponents burden of proof to show that it is irrational for a theist to have faith in God, My opponent has not yet shown this, instead she has only offered her own personal reasons as to why it's seems irrational to believe in God. My opponent has the task of proving all supporting arguments for God are irrational, to prove the resolution true. It is not my duty to prove they are rational but my opponents duty to prove they are irrational. Below I will list twenty arguments that support the existence of God. The Argument from Change 2.The Argument from Efficient Causality 3.The Argument from Time and Contingency 4.The Argument from Degrees of Perfection 5.The Design Argument 6.The Kalam Argument 7.The Argument from Contingency 8.The Argument from the World as an Interacting Whole 9.The Argument from Miracles 10.The Argument from Consciousness 11.The Argument from Truth 12.The Argument from the Origin of the Idea of God 13.The Ontological Argument 14.The Moral Argument 15.The Argument from Conscience 16.The Argument from Desire 17.The Argument from Aesthetic Experience 18.The Argument from Religious Experience 19.The Common Consent Argument 20.Pascal's Wager http://www.peterkreeft.com... Even if my opponent were to find all the above arguments as irrational, which I doubt, then my opponent also has the task of tackling every single argument a theist has ever put forward in the history of time, to verify the resolution as true. Finally I would like to remind Pro and the audience that I do not have the burden of proving the resolution false, I only have the burden of offering rebuttals of my opponents arguments, in other words the resolution could very well be true, but based on the content of this debate, it is Pro burden to prove it, not mine. I was also accused of sidestepping the resolution when maybe it did get derailed by my attempt to answer the questions put forward by Pro. Pro has not offered much reason why atheism is more rational and further has not offered any supporting arguments for atheism, whilst I on the other hand have offered supporting arguments for the existence of God and made an effort to answer the questions put forward by Pro. I Thank Frackjack for making this debate, which has allowed me the opportunity to learn and gain experience in debating. as I understand it I am not to post anything in the last round so will gracefully bow out here. Many thanks.