Basic Flaw in Russel's teaspot Analogy

Russell's teapot, sometimes called the celestial teapot or cosmic teapot, is an analogy first coined by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970) to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making scientifically unfalsifiable claims rather than shifting the burden of proof to others, specifically in the case of religion.^[1] Russell wrote that if he claims that a teapotorbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, it is nonsensical for him to expect others to believe him on the grounds that they cannot prove him wrong. Russell's teapot is still referred to in discussions concerning the existence of God.

The basic fault with this assertion is that it is the common SBOPT ie shift the burden of proof tactic, commonly used by atheists. but the problem is two fold. 

1. If it is said to the atheist, If I do not suppose that God exists, how can you prove that he does not exist?', then he will be able to provide no answer. His position is similar to saying , 'a planet x, some 300 million light years away, does not exist and i believe it does not exist.'

2.  Existence of God is based on evidence, unlike the teaspot existence which is a wild guess. Hence, this is a foolish analogy and a partial thinking process on the part of the proponent. Existence of God is proven beyond any doubt by the cosmological argument, the argument from morality, the teleological argument, the sakina effect, fulfilment of prophecies etc.  and many others. Thus, it is insane to see any analogy between the teasopt and God. Existence of god is deduced , while that of a teaspot is imagined.