I have no empirical evidence that YOUR god exists. That is your problem. I have plenty of empirical evidence that God exists as defined and accepted by millions of other people for many many years and as I have defined the term "God" without ambiguity.
Yes, people have criticised Descartes but, and I know you don't read, but read my articles on human lying. There is no sentence, no story, no article, no book, no clause, in any human language that cannot be contextualized as a lie. Period. That is a fact I proved in my book if you wish to read it. You show no evidence of having read Descartes in the original.
I actually came to Descartes through my study of the computational cognitive neuroscience of human lying. As I said in a prior response, he, amazingly, had it right about 500 years ago, about how the human brain, in fact any nervous system, computes.
Accidently I discovered he also had the same definition of God as I have had for over 50 years. I learned that definition from a course in Theology at Emory University back in 1968. You might check out Tillich as one of easily over a hundred theologians that share my definition.
So don't lie about me. That is lying. I gave you empirical evidence which is empirically true and how to see all the evidence for God, which, as Descartes correctly said, is the stuff of science.
You can reject all science of course and think there is no evidence for God. That is your brain computing. Every brain computes different truths. Another finding from the science of lies.
Again, you should probably note that there is another test here out of the science of lying.