It seems to me that the Op wants objective evidence to prove the existence of God? That’s a tough order. I got news, nobody can do it. How do you pick up a spiritual, omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent being and place him in your hands? You don’t believe in pixies, which we all know can’t be measured because they don’t exist. So, by extension, you surmise God doesn’t exist; after all, He can’t be measured, found, scaled, touched, or understood? But, how are you going to measure God? Are you going to measure Him to see if He meets your satisfaction?
St. Augustine says it can't be done; “But God cannot be said to have measure, lest He should seem to be spoken of as limited. Yet He is not immoderate by whom measure is bestowed upon all things, so that they may in any measure exist. Nor again ought God to be called measured, as if He received measure from any one. But if we say that He is the highest measure, by chance we say something; if indeed in speaking of the highest measure we mean the highest good. For every measure in so far as it is a measure is good; whence nothing can be called measured, modest, modified, without praise, although in another sense we use measure for limit, and speak of no measure where there is no limit, which is sometimes said with praise as when it is said: "And of His kingdom there shall be no limit." Luke 1:33 For it might also be said, "There shall be no measure," so that measure might be used in the sense of limit; for He who reigns in no measure, assuredly does not reign at all.”
It seems to me that a good allegory addressing the Op is that of 'The Watch'. A contemplative Watch is convinced there is no Watchmaker. How does he know? Well, he asked to hear the Maker's ‘tic’; he wanted to hear how fine the Maker's works are. He got no response. He asked the Maker to see the time to measure how accurate the good maker is. He got no response. The Watch didn't have the wherewithal to know that the Maker didn't give him ears with which to hear the Maker’s tic, only hands. Likewise, the Maker didn’t build a face with eyes with which the Watch could see the Maker’s time, only a wildly sweeping hand. Thus, the Watch concluded that he made himself, and he was good. Of course the Watchmaker could only laugh, he knew that the Watch only needed to look at the superiority of his interior workings.
Even still, there is a way to come to know God, through our experiences, some objective, and others subjective. St. Thomas does illustrate a postpriori knowledge of God that can add to our understating of the cosmos. It’s actually simple;
1) Every body in motion was moved by a force from an unmovable being. By extending this we argue that universe was placed in motion by God. Can you provide an alternative?
2) Likewise, everything that can be conceived has an efficient cause. There is a finite order of efficient causes. God is that being for whom there is no efficient cause; which we call the first efficient cause.
3) ) At some point in time there was nothing in existence; as all things come into existence over time. Without a creator who existed in the beginning this becomes absurd. Therefore, we can conclude that the existence of God is of itself its own necessity and not proceeding from another things necessity
4) The measured perfections of existence in the universe can only be understood in comparison with a real and absolute being as a standard, i.e., an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent God.
5) The perfect order of our existence in nature is evidence of creation by a designer who directs all natural things to their end, of whom we call God.
Notwithstanding your ideology, in all things, what God makes are good. No doubt, you’ve enjoyed them for a number of years. And how do you repay the debt – by denying Him because you don’t hear a tic? Some would look at this as a philosophy of “what-makes-me-happy-is-good”, i.e. Hedonism. Is this what makes you OhsoHappy?
So what's the moral of the story? The evidence is in the works.
JoeT
