Let's get down to brass tacks, shall we?

[saras]

2. You made a whole bunch of claims, many unprovable

You claim that there is a single, objective universe, and that someone else's experience and description must match yours, or one of you is WRONG.

You claim that there is a universal, acceptable, cross-cultural standard of "evidence".

You claim that YOUR chosen relationship between "belief" and "reality" MUST be shared by others, or they are WRONG.

You claim that the "natural world" is limited to that portion of the world that your interest group agrees is "real".

For this argument to hold up, it should work exactly as well if I use the traditional Dené (or Hindu) definition of "universe", "evidence", "beliefs", "supernatural", and "reality", instead of yours. Is that okay with you?

Now it happens that I hold as religious truth, accessed through traditional and experimental religious methods of accessing truth, that the first four propositions are, in fact, true. But I'm aware that that's my religion, and that I came to those beliefs through my own experience in the world.