Atheism; evidence evaluation and risk assessment

1. All things, by their existence, testify of a Creator and his power. The same way that a book testifies of the existence of its author, which existence you wouldn't doubt.
2. In addition, your conscience testifies of the laws of this Creator, in whose jurisdiction you live (e.g. dont steal; dont lie). Such laws are built into you.
3. Lastly, our inevitable death is testimony of this Creator's judgment against us when we have broken his laws whereof our conscience bears testimony against us. While you are still alive, you can consider this.

Every person has a personal responsibility to evaluate these things. You do so by your own standard: you set the evidence threshold to determine whether or not these things (still) persuade you.

Comparative evaluation standard:
you see a traffic sign and evaluate it. At face value, you know that sign came from the government, even though:

1. you dont know the person who put the sign there; 
2. you dont see the government itself, only its representatives;
3. you dont require any additional evidence to be persuaded. You see and believe the sign at face value and you understand the power and authority behind it.

Why would you raise the bar with respect to the recognition that all things, your conscience and inevitable death testify of your Creator, his laws, and his judgment against you for breaking those laws?

Whether or not you reckon with this Creator is a different question that concerns risk (chance x effect) assessment and the acceptance of that risk.