Conclusive proof of God

[Esquilax]

Here's the thing about believers who ask us what evidence we would think of as convincing, in reference to a god: they have the process completely backwards, and it's incredibly worrisome, to me, because it says a lot about both their epistemology and their intentions.

First of all, you shouldn't be asking that question at all, because it implies that A: you're going to go out looking for things that will convince us, rather than what's truthful, and B: that you aren't intending to use the evidence that you already have at your disposal in this process. That last part is the interesting bit: by and large, our evidence requirements for a god are no higher than they are for any other thing. You could convince me personally that a god exists using precisely the same level of evidence as for, say, a pack of cards, or a real person.

It should be easy, I'm not looking for some absurd, impossible standard of proof, and frankly, you should already have that level of evidence if you believe right now. If you have to go out and search for evidence that would satisfy my standards, then it is safe to say that you currently have insufficient justification to believe in god right now.

Additionally, by asking that question you're coming into a discussion on a claim not by asking the proper "how do we get as close to the truth as we can on this issue?" but with the far more biased and intellectually incurious "how can I convince you that I'm right, Mr Wrong Person?"