Everything is an interpretation until we have the adequate epistemology to say otherwise.

Surely. And I guess that in your opinion there's no such thing as adequate epistemology to say that a "classical" God doesn't exist. But here is a much better definition of an atheist: a person who regards the existing epistemology as more than enough to raise a healthy denial of an idea that was useful in times where epistemology wasn't even a thing. Or something along these lines.

I don't see this as rhetorical surrend

Ok, but do you see why anyone could consider your reduction of God to a solipsistic blip to be exactly that?

how can you convince me unless you have the ability to see things in a higher resolution than your eyes?

That's an excellent point, in essence the entire discussion around the existence of God could be regarded to be ultimately futile, but notice that it wasn't God who convinced all of these people to believe in him - and it wasn't him convincing all those atheists and agnostics to "drop" their faith, either. So philosophy speaking you're right, I can't convince you with perfect epistemology, but practically - I totally can because we constantly do convince each other off things with much less than adequate epistemology.

This isn't my goal in the conversation of course, I'm just saying..

For example, I can tell you about how the story of a creator is a consequence of our biology and the symbolic framework that it enforces on our psyche, I'd try to explain how God myths were created separately yet so similarly throughout the world and thus render the phaneron of God to be biological necessity.

I am no genius - but I have many questions unanswered.

I take off my hat for you, really. That was a great discussion. Thank you.

powerful institutions and organisations rule the world, and [...] they lie regularly.

I see what you mean, but isn't it the only way? Even the news cannot deliver the facts without misrepresenting some aspect of the subject in some way according to someone. Even our brain, creating every phaneron, is "giving" "us" "his" best guess of what would be most "useful". And governments need to keep much of the information in secret anyway to allow some stability and safety to the people.