The Roman emperors believed in creator gods.   This is why they slaughtered people in arenas---they thought that the creator was their friend and that they wouldn't have to suffer any moral consequences.  

Hitler identified himself as a Christian.  So what?  If I wanted to disprove a belief, merely finding a bad person in history who held that belief wouldn't convince anybody.  Why even bother talking about it?  Why not just address logical arguments like a grownup?

Why this preoccupation with ancient history?   Instead, think of your own immoralities---not other people's---here, now, today.  For example, consider the people whose killing you support---just like the Roman emporers did, because they imagined they were friends with a creator god---just as you imagine you are friends with a creator god.  The result is the same.

Then there's:

"Atheist hate machines like Julien Sorel..."

Which of us is the hate machine?

"...love living on lies."

If I've lied, then by all means, point out what exactly was a lie.

"That is why they make these childish and worthless insults..."

Childish and worthless insults.   hmmmm.  I don't see where I insulted you.  On the other hand---are you being polite to me?

"because atheists are likewise utterly worthless. "

Say, that's not an insult, is it?  Do you mean to say that I'm utterly worthless? 

And pederasty!  Dear me.  Somebody has his mind in the gutter.

I'm surprised that you didn't answer my last question---about who was disproven and how, exactly?  I mean---you brought up the idea of disproving me, but you never said how.  So, if you have proof, come on and speak up---don't be shy!   The issue is:

Since suffering exists, there is evidently no one with both compassion and omnipotence.