This nonsense about proving or disproving god needs a common sense streak to weave through the strands. In fact, to displace them all.
Define your concept of god and it will be disproved, or a different god will be defined to take over as god, within seconds. Which god do you want on the podium? Easy to create that god. Just come with your wish list of the character of the god you would like to see there but at least show some guts by giving reasons why your version of god should supersede all the other criteria out there in the market place. As easy it is to put that god on the podium so easy it will be to remove the god with somebody else’s wish list.
If the argument is that god is definable in terms of some scripture please prove the inerrancy of the particular scripture. But make sure to include the very tests you wish to apply to the scripture to determine its validity and claims so it can also be available for application by others to your scripture and ALL other scriptures, including those you may have to reject in order to tout your particular scripture. Will logic and credibility form part of the tests?
If you posit a god then you must also state what his/her/its hallmarks are. The latter will always depend on your subjective assessment what you PESONALLY BELIEVE. It is simply inescapable. To add the obvious, the biblically derived ideas of god and his/her/its characteristics are an excellent example of how many different belief systems can sprout from the same source material. No need to add more obvious observations except perhaps that the Trinity debacle is still with us. Still unresolved. Anyway, pick your preference. Just bear in mind that others with different preferences of character (and operational expectations like prayer through so-called saints and conditions for salvation) of god will be able to claim quite rightly, if what we term logic is taken to its proper conclusion, that the bases for their preferences disprove the god of others. You can’t have more than one god each with its own personality. Or can you? Hmmmm?
If it is argued that god is mystery unfathomed and undetermined then why bother to even get into an argument about god? Who would then in any event care or be able to ascribe any attributes to such a god? What a waste of time and energy. You would in all probability be wasting your time worshipping or advocating such a god.
In the meanwhile those who insist that their particular god with their ascribed attributes exist must prove it. They are after all relying on some or other source material for their assertions of the nature of god. Show the evidence and the criteria you apply. You after all rely on it. Not the non-believers.
Why must the obvious always be pointed out?