If someone had proven that there was a God, surely that means there can be no proof that there isn't one. The matter would be already settled. So proving God first isn't a valid criterion.
It's not obvious that one needs a brain to be self aware. Here in the physical world that seems a fair belief to be a necessity, but it does presume that there is only a physical world/plane and we aren't more than our physical body.
No, og. Sometimes things are later disproved. I, personally, would be happy with proof- but many wouldn't.
And yes, you need a working brain to interpret information.
I was hoping to exchange ideas that we consider evidence for our own views and then discuss, but the posts so far have shut down this idea.
So pointless thread, pointless category.
There is no proof that there is a god and no proof there isn't. there is proof that people believe in god and others believe there is no such thing. Discussing this any further is one of the most effective ways to kill time - if you have it on your hands and want to.