What would you consider to be evidence for God?

[robvalue]

This is why we have the scientific method, to check the accuracy of our results. Evidence is collected at the end of the process, not at the beginning.

We start with observations, then we form a hypothesis, then we find a way to test the hypothesis in a falsifiable way, then we carry out the test.

Just using logical arguments misses out all these latter vital steps.

It's basically trying to use the tools of science, but in a magical way scientists never thought of to achieve astonishing new results. But the results apply only to the world you're exploring in your head, until you can demonstrate otherwise.

These things almost always amount to:

1) Make observations

2) Announce binding rules based on these observations

3) Notice an apparent paradox caused by the rules

4) Define a special thing that violates the rules, to plug the apparent paradox