Link: “The End of the Teapot Argument for Atheism (and All Its Tawdry Imitators)” by Mark F. Sharlow
Abstract: Atheists sometimes use Bertrand Russell’s teapot argument, and its variants with other objects in place of the teapot, to argue for the rationality of atheism. In this paper I show that this use of the teapot argument and its variants is unacceptably circular. The circularity arises because there is indirect evidence against the objects invoked in the arguments.
Disclaimer: I haven’t read, much less evaluated this paper. Feel free to debate in the combox!