If the burden of proof that God exists rests with religion because it is a claim that requires us to substantiate His existence, then it's opposite does not require it.
The standard claim, then, is that such a supernatural entity or force does not exist. I don't have to prove that the supernatural does not exist. It isn't a claim requiring proof.
If I claim I can fly, you would ask me to prove it. If you claim that people cannot fly, your claim is self-evident and doesn't require proof. To demand such a proof using the flowery language of your erudite learning, disguising your incorrect stance, is a mis-step on your part.
I shall not castigate you in the manner you did me, though.
What I do find quite off-putting in your response is how informal you are with your insults to me. You claim my last sentence is stupid. Then, you elaborate to emphasize this point. But, I reply that it isn't stupid. Science has advanced our understanding of the world incredibly. There used to be many gaps in our knowledge. One by one, science has solved these problems and closed the gaps. Religion is not closing any gaps, and has not done so. In fact, they keep on misleading the masses and get rich doing it. So, when I wrote my last sentence, it was just projecting the trend already established by science. Looking at trends is a very useful thing that wise humans do--not stupid as was claimed by you.
I am glad you teach the sciences to students. I only hope you don't inject it with intelligent design or creationism.
Have a great day. I appreciate that you did read my article. In response, I read your profile, and I only do that with people I detect are a cut above the rest.