Why not ask the question if there exists an "Intelligent Being", which is called "God" in English, "Gott" in German, "Dios" in Spanish, "Theos" in Greek etc, whatever it is called, but independently from his assigned characteristics and purpose, or the ability to communicate with him.

You can put "Atheism" and "Theism" against each other, saying there is no third alternative, and there is no combination of both possible.
There is no way of "Knowing", because since that intelligence is of such higher form and outside our senses and time, we cannot proof with any method that requires experience or reasoning or any form that depends on our material world. We don't have any statistical data either which would help us limiting the probability in any direction.

We can say with absolute certainty that one of the two views is correct and the other is wrong, and the world population is roughly split 50/50 about this question, which does not mean anything by itself, but it shows that there is no consensus on the answer of this question, but it is enough to give the question consideration.

A similar question is about life after death. Does life continue after a person's body dies? People have asked this question already for eternity, but have never found a proof for that. Until recently it was said that life in the deep sea cannot exist in any form. Only after they were able to go below the limits they could explore before they found out that life in deep sea is possible. Before the actual tests could be performed, there were only speculations, and there were a lot of good explanations why life in those depths would not be possible. But it was only speculation, since there was no proof possible. For me that resembles a gamble with two answers, and it could be either of the two.

>reordered...
>
>>After all, there is a 50% chance that God exists, since no proof exists for either belief.
>>
>
>Sorry, no. You inflate this percentage by framing the question in a aristotelean/binary form. Had you asked if
>- a singular God as "commonly" described in Talmud, Bible, Quran and similar books
>- a wheel of life and reincarnation
>- nature-close spirits
>- no supernatural creatures at all existed,
>
>that percentage would be 25% as best guess. Splitting that into the particular form of God into the different strains inside the larger fractions of muslim and christianity, you arrive at much lower levels.
>
>>Independently on which side someone stands, the intellectual mind of humankind always strived to understand its purpose, its origin and the philosophical questions about eternity and God and how man is held responsible for their actions.
>>And if someone believes in God or not, the question will always remain, how did everything begin? The famous "big bang" is not an answer because in itself it would only be a specific point in time, and not the beginning of time or matter itself. As long as someone is seeking and asking these question, I have more respect for that person than for someone who just dismisses everything, and just makes jokes about it for the lack of intellectual ability. It's like the kids that were giggling in school when the teacher discussed the biological differences between man and woman, only they are much older now and it does not seem to be so funny anymore.
>>
>
>IMO one should try to find the [current] borders of science/reasoning and decide if one wants to enter the regions of belief or not. Discussing matters better left in the area of belief is not really a good idea, as there is no commmon basis.
>
>>>Since I have already been identified as deluded by Satan and his minions ( does this flying monkey look familiar?) I may as well go all in.
>>>
>>>I think those who haven't rubbed up against Christian fundamentalists a lot and only encounter them when Michele Bachman's head spins around or in wading through Rick's glossolalia about the End Times might not have an appreciation of just how deep batshit crazy goes. Internet to the rescue.
>>>
>>>Had to share this. Remember, these people get as many votes as you do.
>>>
>>>http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n1/world-born-4004-bc
>>>
>>>By the way, these folks think Pat Robertson is some kind of crazy liberal because he has been duped by Satan into believing the billions of years thing.
>>>
>>>Good website. One of thousands. Get into serious End Time Prophecy ( google a bit ) and there is stuff that makes this look like Scientific American.
>>>
>>>Put on your tinfoil hat and enjoy. I'm frankly tired of hanging back in the face of crazy.