Science has not proved the nonexistence of God, and it may be that it is incapable of doing so.

It isn't science's job to prove or disprove anything.

Which is not to say that God must or even probably exists. It means that science can't disprove that existence.

No, but science can weigh up evidence. Evidence in its scientific sense must pass a number of tests. No evidence for God's existence ever put forward has ever qualified for scientific consideration. Not a single scrap. I've listed stuff many times before that is often put forward as evidence but which isn't. Neither the Bible, St Bernardette nor claimed out-of-body experiences make the cut. And we're not talking about shifting goalposts by unsympathetic, atheistic scientists here either. Just sensible criteria that are crucial in allowing science to move forward.

"Well," you say,"science can't disprove the existence of jet-propelled unicorns either. The idea of 'God' is similar." Very true. But the distinction is that I am the only person who believes in jet-propelled unicorns (and I don't mean to believe much beyond the end of this message), but belief in God or gods has been a nearly universal trait of the human mind.

The fact that belief in God (though I wish you lot would agree on exactly what it is you're supposed to be believing in) is highly popular, which no-one can deny, has often been proposed as evidence for God's existence. Well, the fact that Hitler was very popular doesn't make him a good man, nor does it demonstrate that German people somehow possess a fascism gene. We can only suggest that, in his case, persuasive arguments succeeded in taking a lot of people in. You'll surely agree that that is by far the most likely explanation for millions of Germans "believing in Hitler" as a good man, if you like. It is easy enough to put persuasive arguments for God's existence, usually playing on people's irrational side and often pandering to the propensity in many people to scare easily. The Power and the Glory keeping us all in line.

That, plus the fact that in its simplest form it does not conflict with scientific knowledge, gives it some presumption of credibility, though certainly at a very low level.

Your best hope is to say that God doesn't even touch science at all, not even tangentially. It is impossible for scientific evidence to be presented for God's existence. Many have said that God is beyond science, which is the whole point. I would say that believers themselves have deliberately put God outside science so that he can't be threatened by it. The first essential attribute required of God is that he is beyond threat.