One thing believers always say in argument is that there is no strong evidence that god does not exist. And the atheists have never been able to provide this 'strong evidence'. Some theists who have some capacity to observe and analyse things scientfically, know that the theory of evolution cannot be denied that easily. It is atleast another 'possibilty' - one that obeys the laws of nature. But they also find that there are flaws in the observation. That there are not enough fossils and similar evidence to say that "evolution is exactly what happened." Theists take advantage of this situation. They keep saying 'Even Darwin does not say that his theory is completely true'. And they maintain their position -" No God?!! Prove it! " Athiests have always been forced into a defensive stand .
Now who is supposed to provide the evidence? Is it the ones who says God exists ? or Is it the ones who say God does not exist?? - This is called the 'Burden of proof'. It might seem a tough situation, but you will now learn that its not!
Bertrand Russel made it simple for us with an analogy :
" If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes."This is famous as the Russel's teapot. He also added,
" ....If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity…..."Now we are sure who must come forward with the 'evidence'!!