I honestly can't believe these guys are professionals. Without training his arguments are largely obvious and somewhat frequently argued here.
I got bored very quickly and stopped reading, but one thing that caught my eye was when he compared atheism to belief in an even number of stars. The reason this comparison doesn't work is that there's a 50/50 chance there's an even number of stars, due to two equally likely possibilities. But how many possibilities of things without evidence are there?
Infinite. Unless the theist can provide evidence for a god, the chance one exists is practically zero. And given the infinite number of possible gods, even if a god exists, the chance *their* god is the correct one is also zero.
And of course, I could say the same thing about leprechauns and unicorns. We're not just "agnostic" about whether they exist. Most people can say with reasonable confidence they don't exist, since there is no evidence they *do* exist.
Saying you shouldn't disbelieve in something when there is no evidence is stooping pretty low.
I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.