I once found a way to disprove God. But I can't remember what that is so I'm making it up as I go along.
I've noticed that the term "God" is rarely defined from Religion to Religion. Sometimes it even varies in denominations and certainly an individuals own interpretation.
But the fun doesn't stop there. It's not just "what" something is, but how it works, where it is, if it's thinking, if it has any control etc etc etc bla bla bla.
Here's the fun part. The Religious generally alter their belief structure if/when new knowledge arises. I've seen varying (but admittedly, not very reliable) studies suggesting about 77% of Christians globally accept evolution. There are obviously scientists such a Robert Bakker and Ken Miller who are both top notch but also deeply Religious.
But no one, not a single person who have interpreted their Religion to 'include' evolution prior to it's discovery. Prior to this happening people would have chosen a different explanation.
So it's basically, science is altering Religion based on what is known.
However the general public aren't academics and not everyone is a critical thinker. So not all Religious people will be able to incorporate all the discoveries into their ever interpreted beliefs. Some even deny the discoveries that they're aware of, however they have a massive misunderstanding of what it actually is.
So I put forward that someone's interpretation of their beliefs and (possibly) a God is dependant on their intellect. If someone has a lower intellect, their interpretation of what they define as 'God' is going to inevitably conflict with current knowledge.
If that individuals interpretation is contradicted with what is currently known, then the likelihood of that particular God existing is dramatically low and cannot exist.
Therefore, you have just managed to disprove a God. Maybe just a single interpretation of what a "god" is, how it works, where it is etc, but disproving nonetheless.
Food for thought.