What would you consider to be evidence for God?

[Angrboda]

No, restating the assertion is not the same as answering the question. I asked how it can precede a brain.

In fact, you've hurt your argument far worse than merely restating the point. You're begging the question, presupposing the conclusion in order to make the argument appear to work. "The first brain requiredbe thinking to be pre-existent, therefore thought preceded the first brain." You still need to demonstrate that.

How? Not a problem.  
Created from a far superior mind. Any scientific proof? None. However, it’s inference to the best explanation.

Inference to best explanation is based on the probabilities of the relevant hypotheses with respect to the evidence and with respect to what we would expect given background knowledge. Since the probability of God existing cannot be calculated, hypotheses involving God cannot take part in an inference to the best explanation.

Your ignorance of Bayesian logic betrays you. Nice fail, snowtracks. You always crack me up.