Plenty of evidence out there, the real trick is that you have have an open mind. Go looking for evidence and you will find it, go looking to have your mind changed and you wont.
The best arguments against the existence of God are usually the 'pain and suffering' type of objections but even they can be adequately addressed, even if people don't like the answers.
Unproven scientific theories are not very convincing IMO, especially when they seem motivated by a-priori beliefs themselves.
Evidences for the existence of God are many. Creation itself for starters. The cosmological constants and the absolute precision present in the universe in order to sustain life on Earth can only be called 'coincidence' by someone with great faith. IMO subjective experiences should not be lightly dismissed either. Sure, they might not stand up to rigorous scientific scrutiny but science is only one small way to find truth. The Kalaam cosmological argument has not be adequately refuted either IMO.
"It is hard to overstate the impact that William Lane Craig has had for the cause of Christ. He is simply the finest Christian apologist of the last half century and his academic work justifies ranking him among the top 1 percent of practicing philosophers in the Western world. Besides that, he is a winsome ambassador for Christ, an exceptional debater, and a man with the heart of an evangelist. I know him well and can say that he lives a life of integrity and lives out what he believes. I do not know of a single thinker who has done more to raise the bar of Christian scholarship in our generation than Craig.
Craig's 30-page essay soundly refutes Richard Dawkins's The God Delusion. Craig concludes,
We've examined five traditional arguments for the existence of God in light of modern philosophy, science, and mathematics:
the cosmological argument from contingency the kalam cosmological argument based on the beginning of the universe the moral argument based upon objective moral values and duties the teleological argument from fine-tuning the ontological argument from the possibility of God's existence to his actuality
These are, I believe, good arguments for God's existence. That is to say, they are logically valid; their premises are true; and their premises are more plausible in light of the evidence than their negations. Therefore, insofar as we are rational people, we should embrace their conclusions."
