I'm afraid I don't agree with you, holybuckets. And if you had bothered to read my earlier posts in this thread, rather than trying to blow them off by saying, "Go read Anfauglir's, that'll answer your questions", you might understand why that is.
Anything in the universe (including something that is only temporarily in it) will necessarily leave evidence of its existence behind. That includes your god, since he would have to enter the universe somehow in order to do anything within it. Even if he could do so remotely (say, by being able to manipulate things inside the universe without entering), he would still leave some evidence of it having happened, and that evidence could be detected and examined by scientific methodology. And even if it was something beyond our current ability to detect, it would still leave a footprint that we could eventually discover (just as we can use the residues of radioactive decay to date things that are thousands, millions, or even billions of years old).
The fact that we've never once detected anything like this is telling. It leads to one of four inescapable conclusions. First, that your god doesn't exist and therefore never has done anything that could be detected in the first place; second, that your god exists but has never done anything that could be detected; third, that your god exists and has done things that could be detected, but has done so in such a way as to hide that fact from us; and fourth, that your god exists and has done things that could be detected, and we simply do not possess the ability to detect them at this point in time.
I think we can safely rule out the third option, because of the fact that your god has supposedly revealed himself to humans in the past. Therefore, there is no reason to conclude that he would start hiding his presence for no reason. Similarly, option 1 and 2 are essentially the same thing - a god that exists but does nothing is fundamentally no different from a god which doesn't exist, from a human perspective (not to mention that your religion claims your god has revealed himself to humans in the past). So, either your god doesn't exist, or he exists and has done things that we can't currently detect through science.
However, there's an additional point to consider. Your god has apparently done nothing that is distinguishable from random chance since humans developed the ability to actually search for scientific evidence of his actions. While that isn't proof, it does beg the question of why. The usual Christian apologetics (such as "God wants people to have faith" and so on) are hardly satisfactory explanations for that.
That being said, it's true that one cannot demonstrate the non-existence of your god using scientific methodology. But it would be possible to demonstrate the existence of your god through that same methodology.
What kind of evidence would I accept? Scientific evidence, because it would prove the existence of your god beyond a reasonable doubt. If you have some other kind that you could present that meets a similar standard, feel free to propose it here, but don't expect me to play "guess the kind of evidence" with you.