It may seem that way because I just dropped that presumption of atheism in the comment. But I've written hundreds of articles on religion and atheism.

The exoteric conceptions of God are all incoherent nonstarters. The esoteric ones are dubious in lots of other ways or they're consistent with atheism. Thus, the intellectual default in the modern, science-centered period shifted from theism to atheism. Consequently, theists have the burden of proof.

Atheism isn't a hypothesis in any case, so it's irrelevant whether it's supported by independent evidence. The relevant hypotheses would be naturalism, materialism, secular liberalism, and so on. And there's plenty of evidence on their side.

I'll just point you to a few links, if you're interested.

https://medium.com/interfaith-now/do-atheists-and-theists-have-the-same-burden-of-proof-24a4bc0013d1?sk=ade555e68cef719b6d01fec2dba9371c

https://medium.com/interfaith-now/atheism-and-the-burden-of-refuting-the-preposterous-53aba4657168?sk=750116916d079705a9e0e1d97296bcfa

https://medium.com/the-philosophers-stone/must-atheists-prove-theres-no-god-312537dd4b55?sk=05ac18b41bea690566e470419724fcc0