I think a lot of people are caught in the various beliefs that Christianity installs in you from an early age. It takes some intellectual work to throw off those shackles, and many people just never manage to get that far. That has allowed Christianity to persist.

A distinction should be made between failing to prove something and disproving it. The geocentric model and the practice of alchemy, for example, have been disproven, but one cannot disprove the existence of God any more than one may disprove the existence of leprechauns. The point here is that we need not waste our time disproving fictions. We may simply state that those who assert there is a God have failed to meet their burden of proof, due to insufficient, if nonexistent, evidence.

this is a non logical argument, when using two non related subjects, one is based on faith, whilst the other is based on the scientific principle of proof

Because we’ve been inquisitive and experimental and results driven. We’ve learned to hypothesize and test.