The easiest defence of faith made by religious people is that religion and science are in different realms - so proving anything said (e.g. god exists) does not require "scientific" evidence.  You can talk about experiences and the feeling of god's love and other non-provable non-evidence then use that to prove that, for you, god exists.  This is of course total nonsense.  But if you find yourself arguing with someone who is clever with words, you may not be able to shoot them down immediately.

This kind of argument is particularly likely to be used when a theist (e.g. Rabbi David Wolpe) is trying to win a point with a top scientist (e.g. Sam Harris).  But Sam did better than I would have done - I would have needed a few hours to think it over.  Reminds me of the time a well meaning friend was using logical arguments as to why I should not leave my (first) wife!  I knew he was wrong but didn't know why.  Much later I figured it out but many people can't bring to mind a good counter argument when faced with what seems like a good rational argument.

Anything that is true, can be supported by evidence and can be proved using the scientific method.  This article does not have space to prove that point and "people of faith" would not accept the logic anyway.  But simple examples go a long way to make a complex point.   That's what Sam does at the end of this video.

In January 2008, Sam Harris debated Rabbi David Wolpe at the American Jewish University and made a good response to the nonsense being spouted.  In this case, Rabbi Wolpe was trying to say that all scientific arguments about the existence of god were irrelevant  - but Sam demolished him.

The full debate is here

| More...