Like what? Can you give examples?
Of natural complexity? First, what is complexity? Roughly, we can equate it with the number of parameters necessary to completely describe an object or situation. So, a perfect, solid gold sphere is relatively simple. It's diameter alone is all we need to know to specify its morphology. Its composition is specified by the word gold. Contrast that with a mountain (you can ignore any living cells on it). Orders of magnitude more parameters are needed to define its contours and composition. This is why we call a living cell complex. It's constituents and their organization require a very large number of parameters to specify, but is that more complex than a galaxy?
Life on earth has a defintion which requires certain qualities as a consequence of God's infinity.
Gods appear nowhere in science. No scientific definition of life refers to gods.
Their (false) god is denial. They are faithfully devoted to it and serve it.
Many theists become frustrated with critical thinkers and their criteria for belief, which rejects the unfalsifiable claims of religions. And yes, I am absolutely committed to reason over faith.
Theism feels wrong doesn't it? But denial feels right?
Gods don't meet the critical thinkers criteria for belief, so yes, rejection of insufficiently supported god claims is right.
But since your definition of God is so shallow and corrupt, you do not realize humanism's rules do not apply.
Your worldview is not mine. Your ethical system is not mine. And like other humanists, I apply mine to all of reality and even to hypothetical moral agents. This frustrates believers. "Don't judge my god," they protest. "Your rules don't apply there." Yes, they do.
@Trailblazer has evidence. The manifestations of God, as defined by th Baha'i faith ARE evidence of God.
The evidence she offers doesn't suggest the existence of a god to one skilled in the proper interpretation of evidence.
The standard rules to connect evidence to conclusions requires proper defintions
It's all been done long ago. It's there for you to learn.
it is pretty clear that human free will would make every wrong on Earth humans' fault since humans committed those wrongs.
That is rather obvious if one can reason logically and rationally.
Lets take your logic and reason a step further. Does God have free will?
'Free will makes man responsible, but not God' is a good example of special pleading. The rules for man and god are different, but no justification for that is given better than "He's a god and you're not" with no explanation why that exempts the from ethical analysis.
your parents did that, but they are not responsible for what you do any more than God is responsible.
The law disagrees if the child is a minor.
There is no event and there are no logically sound arguments that will prove that God exists. We can only prove that to ourselves by looking at the evidence that God has provided.
If there is evidence that a god or any other thing exists, then we detect that evidence and come to a logically sound conclusion about it.
How else do you think we would get evidence for God if God did not provide it?
The same way we get evidence that any other thing that exists provides - through the senses. If gods exist, they are detectable like everything else that exists. To be real - to exist - means to interact with other existing things in space and time. If gods exist, they are detectible somewhere somehow. If they make no detectible impact on reality, they meet the definition of the nonexistent. I assume that you reject that. You'd pretty much have to defend the existence of something that generates no evidence.
I realize that there are aspects of reality that are unknown, but only because the right measurement hasn't been made yet. Dark matter is a good example. It's impact on reality was finally detected studying the physics of galaxy rotation and the large-scale structure of the universe. The only evidence was a gravitational effect, but that was detected and dark energy was postulated as its source. Suppose that dark matter didn't exert a detectable gravitational pull or any other effect on reality. It is causally disconnected from nature. It makes no discernable impact on physical reality. It is no longer meaningful to say it exists, and being unfalsifiable, claims about it are neither right nor wrong, and never decidable..