Man I hate this argument. I can't disprove that there's a mutated mirror-being of Bob Saget floating in the universe and that every time he blinks a baby goat explodes. And also he's immune to any detection by human senses or otherwise. See? That's not provable, nor is it disprovable. However, by all human understanding and logic, I need no evidence to conclude that it's extremely improbable and quite stupid. This is how I view theism. Hell, that doesn't even contradict any established scientific theory like theistic creationism does.

What scientists can come up with based on the workings of the known universe, even mere hypotheses rooted only in speculation, will always outclass in plausibility what theism has to offer. This is because the former is based on fact. Things we know and that can be observed. The latter is based on a book, and that's all. I think we're doing a pretty bang-up job of discovering how everything came into being on our own. Between the Big Bang, the Solar Nebula, the forming of Earth and the moon and the creation of various pre-cellular theories, there's really no reason for a God to have been there; it's like an afterthought that's just there to give people the warm fuzzies.