There is no god or gods!

[Jackalope]

Better wording: "Well, if you have the burden of proof for saying that god exists, and you cannot provide any empirical evidence for it, it is logical to conclude that he almost certainly does not."

That would be the case if empirical evidence should reasonably be expected to be found. If not, then we're back at only being able to conclude that we can't come to a conclusion.

Let's look at another problem to illustrate what I mean. Consider multiverse theory. There is theoretical support for the hypothesis, but nothing in the way of empirical evidence that supports multiverse theory over the standard inflationary model. In fact, the nature of the theory makes it impossible at this time to test empirically.

On that basis, it is certainly not reasonable to conclude that it is true, nor is it reasonable to conclude that it is false, or (in your words) almost certainly false (on the basis of empiricism). We cannot hope to prove something true or false based on empirical evidence we are not positioned to gather.

As another example, we cannot empirically examine the non-observable portion of our universe. It exists nonetheless.

This is not to say that a deity with specific contradictory properties could not be logically ruled out, of course.

---

Well, if someone claiming to be god did something previously proven impossible, that would be a good start. (And I'm not talking something probably impossible, I mean like making a live dog materialize out of thin air by snapping his fingers).

That of course raises more questions. Was the "miracle" real? Or were you fooled?

I saw a magician cut a woman in half and then put her back together once. Of course it was an illusion, but that serves to illustrate the point: if you witness something known to be impossible, absent any natural explanation of how it was done, how would you know if it was real, illusion, or hallucination?

Furthermore.... What is a god? What is impossible?

The questions aren't quite as simple as they may seem.