LOL. I see "I am God and I exist" when I look at a full moon on a clear night.
In your explanation, you point out that lack of evidence is given as the reason for their (atheists) lack of faith. Yet when we get down to it, the root question is at the very foundation of Science and faith. Where did we come from and why?
I contend that science doesn't answer this any better than faith. And to believe in any theory that has been proposed regarding the origins of the universe takes.... Faith. Science is easier to "believe" because we can turn water to ice and call it science (which it is). Things associated with science can be observed with senses. Things with faith have to be experienced. If a soul has never experienced such things that our faith bestows upon us, it is hard to simply explain.? How can an atheist cherish life and not fear death, thus living in fear? They must then be sure of the futile and insignificant thing their own existence is?
No, I think maybe you missed my point. Lack of evidence is not reason for atheists’ lack of faith. Lack of faith is the reason that they require evidence. Your example is a good one. You look at the moon and see “I am God and I exist” because you have faith. An atheist, who lacks faith, sees a ball of rock that arose from natural processes. They would need to see direct evidence of God before they would believe.
As far as science goes, I think you are reading your religion into science. The scope of science is limited, and scientists are the first ones who will tell you this (and I am a scientist myself, so I do know what I’m talking about). Science does not and cannot make value judgements. For example, how humans came to be on earth is a valid question in evolutionary theory. Why people are on earth is not. What the early universe looked like and the changes it underwent as it developed is a valid question for big bang theory. Why and to what purpose it happened is not.
The problem many have is that, while science does not make value judgements, many scientists do. What they are doing when they do so is not science, however. If a particular scientist states that evolution shows that God doesn’t exist, that’s not a scientific finding, but rather an opinion of a particular scientist. You would not say that Christianity is to blame when a priest molests a child, right? Certainly such actions are against all moral teachings of Christianity. Not everything a priest (or pastor, etc) says or does is reflective of Christian thought. In similar vein, not everything a scientist does or says is reflective of scientific thought.