Good short and simple argument against God

[CliveStaples]

Here's a couple responses, not necessarily consistent with each other:

1) The difference is that God exists in our world.
2) The world you describe isn't possible, since God necessarily exists in all possible worlds.

Yet in both cases remains totally undetectable; as such, even if it were to exist, the Universe still plays out exactly as would be expected if it didn't.

Oh, was there a "detectability" requirement? And what does the standard of "detectability" require--i.e., when precisely is something "detectable" and when does it fail to be "detectable"?

---

Here's a couple responses, not necessarily consistent with each other:

1) The difference is that God exists in our world.
2) The world you describe isn't possible, since God necessarily exists in all possible worlds.

1) There's no demonstrable evidence or reasoned argument to support this assertion.
2) The Ontological argument? Really?

1) I didn't say that there was. I was only outlining different responses that could be made; I wasn't making those responses myself, or providing the reasoning made to mount an effective argument for them.

2) You could think of it that way, I suppose. The Ontological argument isn't the only way to argue that God 'necessarily' exists.