That's not obvious to me. Please explain.
God must exist beyond that which is objectively verifiable else God is not God.
Or, rather, the only conception of God that might be
technically objectively provable/disprovable would be a particularly boring and pedantic Deistic conception (which I would not recognise as 'God' in any case) and, frankly, don't we all have better things to be worrying about that
that?
But a) stupid and b) ultimately masturbatory and therefore not honest and therefore, from one point of view, impossible to truly answer.
If a question can't be answered honestly (this one can't) then it's a useless question and is probably only being asked for rhetorical purposes. Or at least that's my suspicion.