[antiRepublicrat]

Other scientists try to to reproduce the concept independently. If this type of proof cannot be done, then the concept is rejected.

Those making the positive assertion that there is a God are burdened with the responsibility of providing supporting scientific evidence and argument, not those who find the evidence lacking. As you said, this type of proof couldn't be done, so the concept (of God) was rejected.

Dawkins goes a step further and makes the positive assertion that there's no possible way God could exist. Here's where I start disagreeing with Dawkins because of his attempt to prove a negative, which I find illogical in this case, instead of simply not accepting the unproven assertion that God exists.

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

Those making the positive assertion that there is a God are burdened with the responsibility of providing supporting scientific evidence and argument,

No, it's the other way around. Those who blather on about how there is no God, being as they are a tiresome burden on society, have the burden of proving whatever nonsense they are spouting.