My argument for atheism +

[Agnostico]

Atheism: The belief that God almost certainly doesn't exist.

Reason for this: There is no evidence for god where there should be (not just that "there is no evidence..." that's agnosticism.)

Counter from theists: God created the universe/did the fine tuning/created humans/the Kalam/The argument from contingency/the Fine Tuning argument etc etc.

My counter for atheism that beats all arguments for God: God doesn't have a brain or neurons - he's immaterial not made of matter or energy - so how can he think thoughts or have knowledge? Without a brain or neurons he couldn't create a universe or create anything else.

I've never got any evidence that God can think without a brain or neurons.

First you said that u believe "that God almost certainly doesn't exist"

You then go to describe this God which u believe doesn't exist "God doesn't have a brain or neurons - he's immaterial not made of matter or energy"

How can u possibly describe something if it doesn't exist?
To describe something and define it means that u must believe it exists

Is this is a theological definition of God u are using? It may satisfy your need to explain away one particular definition of God but there are many religions with many Gods that don't match your definition

Also absence of evidence doesn't equal evidence of absence. 
Its a logical fallacy known as arguing from ignorance

For example there was a building material called asbestos
When it was being used there was no evidence that it did any harm
It was only found later on that asbestos is a carcinogenic 
They thought it was ok cos the evidence of harm was absent then

To a person who believes that God almost certainly doesn't exist i ask them how they think the universe was made? And to prove their theory...

I ask them if mankind knows everything or if there are unknowns?
And within the unknown how can u be sure there is no God?
U know there is no God in the unknown? Its not possible