What would you consider to be evidence for God?

[Longhorn]

And dog butts. Can't forget the dog butts!

.....who I've never met, seen, or heard from and only know about from other people and dubious sources. Not very unambigious is it? Especially considering the OTHER 20+ major religions.

Of which you must apply the types of evidence listed above and make a judgment.  I believe that Julius Caesar was a real person but I have never met, seen or heard from him and only know about from other people and historical documents.  You say dubious sources, but I know very few scholars who would deny that a person named Jesus of Nazareth existed and was crucified by the Romans under Pontius Pilate.  Where they start to disagree is the resurrection.

But the evidence needs to be proportionate to the claim.

'I had breakfast' would require virtually no evidence, because it's a fairly normal thing to do for a human being to have breakfast every day.

'I had breakfast with the president' would require much more evidence, and 'I had breakfast with Jesus on the moon' can be dismissed instantly without really convincing evidence.

So whereas the evidence for the existence of Julius Ceasar is sufficient, the evidence for a son of god is laughable.