You're being too verbose, which makes me personally find discussion with you rather tiring, and you're not addressing the actual points I'm making. Let me try to ask some more specific questions

1) Below which point do you want us treating a prior probability as effectively 0, and should never be updated upwards no matter what evidence? E.g. one in a billion? One in a trillion? What's the exact point, and can you justify it to me?

2) Why do you keep talking about things not being "causally linked", since all of the examples of Pascal's mugging given above do describe causal links? It's not as if I said anything weird about acausal trade or some such, every example I gave describes normal causal links.

Assigning it a probability of 0 is what humans do, after all, when it call comes down to it,

Humans don't tend to explicitly assign probabilities at all.

If someone walks up to you on the street and claims souls exist, does that change the probability that souls exist? No, it doesn't.

Actually since people rarely bother to claim that things exist when they actually do (e.g. nobody is going around claiming "tables exist", "the sun exists") such people claiming that souls exist are probably minor evidence against their existence.