Greetings, dear reader. Remember this?

James Randi’s Million Dollar Challenge: Professional stage magician James Randi offered a $1,000,000 prize to anyone who could demonstrate paranormal abilities — including psychokinesis and telekinesis.

I contend that there is no evidence for god.

That is not just clickbait for evangelicals and apologists: it’s an assertion that I can substantiate.

I can’t offer you a $1 million prize but I promise to read everything you submit to www.atheismuk.com and, for starters, we have a £100 prize for the first person to provide evidence for god. Use the form below to submit your evidence.

First of all, I need to make it clear that I am not claiming that there is no god. I am claiming that there is no evidence for a god. That’s an important distinction. Before you challenge me, please make sure you are aiming at the right target: no evidence, not no god.

So what is evidence?

It’s easier to say what it is not.

Obviously we need evidence to be incontrovertible or it is useless. So we can rule out testimonies — we know that witnesses are unreliable — people will talk loosely, lie and exaggerate or spin for their advantage. We need to be able to check their claims; we should demand, “Show me how I can observe your ‘evidence’ myself.”

My late grandfather told me he once drove Queen Victoria in one of the first cars on the Isle of Wight. I can’t check that and neither can you. Dead ‘witnesses’ cannot be considered to have provided evidence and reports of their claims by people like me are just hearsay: I wasn’t there. Does this remind you of anything?

Multiple, independent observations are evidence; nothing else. So, challengers need to provide detectable physical evidence. I’ll accept indirect evidence — e.g. god’s DNA on Mary’s virginal underwear…

This will be contested by lawyers, who often have lower standards — when they can’t find the smoking gun, they might say something like, “I have a witness who heard a gunshot.” Sorry, that’s not good enough. It could have been an engine backfiring. There can be no substitute for the gun itself. We don’t want unsafe conclusions; this is important — some people die for their belief in god and others kill for it. We need indisputable evidence.

Evangelicals will point to the Bible, their scripture (that word just means ‘writings’). Sadly for them, that book is not a reliable source of information. It’s a mixture of fantasy (a talking snake, a man made from dirt, a woman made from the man’s rib, photosynthesising plants created before the sun, a worldwide flood, and other fictions) and unverified claims of virgin birth, miracles and resurrection. Also, it frequently contradicts itself and gives bad advice like how to beat your slave until he’s not quite dead!

Neither does the Bible meet the standards for good historicity, which requires multiple, independent, contemporary, corroborating accounts. The Bible is a single edited collection of writings and there are no independent, contemporary, corroborating accounts of its content. Indeed, some of the prospective gospels were rejected by the Council of Nicaea, whose instructions were to make a faith book that could sustain Emperor Constantine’s rule. Although he died before completion, the Council’s mission was a success — the Roman Catholic church survives to this day.

Narrative rules over evidence, apparently! Should it? Would you accept being convicted based on who told the better story: the prosecution or your defence barrister? I think not. Rightfully so. You should demand evidence.

So, don’t give me quotes from the Bible. Think about it, you might reject quotes from the Book of Mormon, the Hindu Vedas or the Quran. If you can do that, so can I.

Apologists may claim that the existence of their god can be ‘proven’ by argument. That’s not good enough — an argument is just an association of ideas — a mental fabrication. Would you accept armchair reasoning for the existence of Monster Nessie without going to Loch Ness to look? I think not, and you would be right not to. All I am asking for is the same standard of verification for god.

Furthermore, ‘proof’ is not available in reality because it can be absolute: that’s the very thing that nature is not. So ‘proof’ is also just a mental concept, unlike evidence, which can actually be observed. Do not attempt to challenge me with an argument, no matter how logical or reasonable. This is not about solving a word puzzle, this is about observing evidence for a god.

Nevertheless, nobody can eliminate the possibility of a god existing. Perhaps we should investigate… At the very least, that would require:

1. knowing what to look for (there are no agreed properties or characteristics of a god)
2. then searching the entire universe
3. and not finding a god anywhere.

That investigation is fraught with difficulties — we would have to know the limits of the universe (we don’t currently) and instantaneously blast all locations with all possible methods of detection, otherwise it could be alleged that god simply evaded our observers as they wended their way around the vastness of the universe, checking for his absence quadrant by quadrant.

Then there’s the cop out claim that god is actually outside the universe, wherever that is supposed to be… If you try that dodge on me, I will ask you to produce evidence for an extra-universe realm. You’ve gone backwards! There’s two claims to be substantiated now!

So, not only is there no evidence for a god currently, but the prospects of discovering evidence for a god in the future are extremely remote. We don’t know what we are looking for, and we don’t know how to look or where to look. Is he at the ‘centre’ of the universe creating new hydrogen? Where’s that?

We still can’t rule out a god, though. If anyone ever tells you there is no god, ask them how they know that. Demand evidence.

I stand by my claim that there is no evidence for any god. Currently. Maybe you have some… That’s why I’m issuing this challenge. Feel free to send your evidence using the form below.

But don’t waste my time with mysteries. Gaps in our knowledge are questions not answers and, therefore, not evidence for your god. Give me positive observational evidence FOR your god and, remember, I want to be able to see it for myself. I don’t believe anyone, not even my late grandfather. If you saw your god through a telescope, invite me along to look. I’ll bring my camera.

Also don’t waste my time with metaphysics — that’s abstract ideas with no basis in reality — mental fabrications, just thoughts, some of which are useful reasoning tools and others are in the realm of Humpty Dumpty. In order to affect the cosmos, which is what you are hoping for when you pray, your god must be a material phenomenon not an abstract entity. ‘Ghosts’ pass through walls without noticing them. Allegedly.

I’m not impressed by other people’s opinions either, so don’t tell me that fairytale author, C S Lewis, believed in your god and therefore I should! And, finally, don’t tell me you had a vision of god. That is neither shareable nor distinguishable from a dream, migraine or psychotic event. Many people who claim to be Jesus are in custody…

Check list

Before submitting your challenge please test it against this list. If what you offer as evidence matches any of these descriptions, don’t bother to send it. So, is it based on any of the following?

1. Argument
2. Mystery
3. Scripture
4. Tradition
5. Metaphysics
6. Transcendency
7. Opinion
8. Vision

— and most of all, don’t accuse me of claiming there is no god.

I don’t claim that. Nobody can.

Good Luck!

(Of course, evidence or no evidence, you can choose to believe whatever you like. Just be aware that it’s no more significant than whether you choose tomato ketchup or BBQ sauce on your fries.)