The fundamental argument of this article is correct in a limited sense (e.g. you can't apply probability statistics to absurdities that are data-free) but the deeper argument is missed entirely. As is so often the case, the nature of atheism is mis-stated. Atheists don't "not believe in gods." Atheists are people who prefer reality to infantile fantasies. There is no inherent limit on the number of silly things people can persuade themselves to believe in. Atheists don't "not believe in" fairies, flat Earths, QAnon conspiracies, unicorns, pots of gold at the end of rainbows, probe-fetishist space-aliens, or any of the thousands of other infantile beliefs people conjure up. Instead, atheists simply say "show me the evidence." As Marcello Truzzi said, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." So far, no mythology at any point in time anywhere on Earth has provided even the slightest shred of real evidence for the existence of any of their gods, goblins, ghouls, or ghosts. I could claim that I am surrounded by trillions of invisible ethereal magical chickens and then shout "you can't prove they don't exist!" but that would qualify me only for (a) time in a mental hospital, or (b) becoming the leader of yet another cult. Religionists are no different, only their mental hospitals are called churches. Belief in things for which there is zero evidence, and for which everything we know to be true about the universe says must be impossible, is merely intellectual indolence, or, at best, a sad lack of basic ability to reason.