This is really dumb. The author tries to say atheists are wrong because they can't prove a negative. That is the very kind of twisted illogic that leads to religion in the first place. I don't have to prove there is no god, that is one of the counter arguments believers always say. But it is a stupid argument. If you provide me with evidence of a god, I will consider it. If not, I will not believe it, and I don't have to prove anything to you.

Furthermore, you don't have to believe in god to believe in "life" after death. There may be all kinds of transformations after death, and a magical sky god that looks just like you is not necessary. Show me evidence of life after death and I will consider it, without leading to the conclusion that a god is handling the details.

"God" is nothing more than a massive crutch, the catchall bucket that explains all the things we can't explain through logic or scientific research. So what if people didn't accept the existence of black swans - when evidence was presented, they were accepted. IMHO, the main reason for religion and for the belief in a god is for control, the only way to keep the unruly rabble manageable, when governmental systems prove inadequate. A salve to cheer up the meek, and keep them compliant.