It seems to me that an open-minded thinker, free of biases and misconceptions, would have no choice but to acknowledge the veracity of this argument. When properly understood, it is simple, direct -- and tough to refute. Why then does it seem to have so few backers?
Those who lack the atheists' certitude that there is no afterlife, and who have never seen, and never will see, proof of the existence of God, are the agnostics -- those who do not "presume to know." Some are tempted toward the notion that underlies the famous bet of Blaise Pascal.
Some atheists may not object to practices of the believer, but at bottom atheists find it painful to admit that knowledge is limited. Yet science itself, supposedly the atheist's greatest ally, shows that it is.
Self-declared atheists not only report getting angry at God, but report higher levels of anger than that experienced by believers. How does that work? Why bother being angry at something which one doesn't believe even exists?
Thanks to Einstein and his formula we can begin to appreciate, despite our ego and pride, the insignificance and inadequacy of our understanding of the unfathomable sea of energy that surrounds, and likely, created us.