Let's think about Big Foot, for example. What evidence would I need in order to be convinced that there is such a creature as Big Foot?
I might be satisfied with any of the following:
1. Multiple eye witness testimonies from people that I know and trust.
2. High quality video footage that I know has not been doctored.
3. A personal encounter with Big Foot.
4. Good forensic data of Big Foot's existence such as unique DNA, footprints, Big Foot's dwelling place, or perhaps even the remains of a dead Big Foot creature.
There might even be other evidence that I've not yet considered that could also be convincing.
See? It's not difficult to imagine what kinds of evidence might be convincing. Why can you not produce a similar list for the existence of God?
I'm not sure I'm following you. Yes, you can think of things that might convince you that Bigfoot exists. And yes, you might think of things that would convince you that God exists.
But why is it necessary for you to be presented with a list of acceptable evidence for God before you offer the evidence you have? Presumably you have reasons to believe that God exists. Presumably you think they are good ones and would convince any other reasonable person. So, why not just tell us what they are?
You ask "Why can you not produce a list of evidence you would accept for the existence of God?"
The answer is, it's an irrelevant step, and its use is frankly suspicious. Presumably you already know what evidence you have, and how convincing it would be to a reasonable person. Your failure to promptly produce such evidence only makes us wonder if you perhaps know it to be of a low quality and wish to prevent its being examined; and your asking "what sort of evidence might convince us" sounds like the kind of thing a cold reader would ask in order to fabricate such evidence. Not that I'm accusing you, of course; but that's what it reminds me of!
Take your Bigfoot example. Imagine how it might go, with a dialogue between two people such as this:
A: So, you believe Bigfoot actually exists, and you think you have good evidence?
B: Yes.
A: Wow, sounds exciting! What is this evidence you have?
B: Ah, ah, ah! That would be telling.
A: Well, yes, it
would be telling. That's the point. We'd like you to tell us.
B: First, why don't
you tell
me what evidence would convince you that Bigfoot exists?
A: Uh...why?
(I wasn't able to imagine the answer to this one. Let's continue)
A: Well, if you insist. Do you have multiple eye witness testimonies from people that you know and trust?
B: No.
A: Do you have high quality video footage that you know has not been doctored?
B: No.
A: Have you had a personal encounter with Big Foot?
B: I have not.
A: Well, then, do you have some good forensic data of Big Foot's existence such as unique DNA, footprints, Big Foot's dwelling place, or perhaps even the remains of a dead Big Foot creature?
B: No.
A: Well, then, why don't you just tell us what you do have?
So. You think God exists? And you think you have convincing evidence of this? Great. Present it, so we can examine it together.