Denise's point was not about evidence, she was responding to the way you framed your foregoing argument, which also wasn't about evidence. You framed them on the basis of assuming that everyone is agreed that DNA coded animals are the only form of intelligence. But not everyone shares that assumption. If you want to shift the discussion to why or why not people might believe in intelligence, that is fine, but do so openly, don't imply that the question was about the why, or evidence, in the first place, as it wasn't. That was just an argumentative ruse you used after the fact of Denise having corrected you.
The quote you included is elementarily illogical. Atheism is the belief that god does not exist, so someone who believes in God is not an atheist. Therefore, with normal definitions, the statement is just incoherent.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: