In science you need evidence to prove or kill a hypothesis. No evidence means it can't be a theory or be debunk. Faith is not sciences and opinion isn't too. They is exactly no proof that god or a god is real. And I mean a creator not the Christian god. In science, it's not guilty until proven, other wise the big bang would been ignored. It's not innocent until guilty. If so then there is Super Powerful Invisible Space Monkey defending the world. It's debatable until we have evidence to prove or debunk the hypothesis. This is about science, not religion.
No one has managed to to do it yet. In the entire history of the world, no skeptic has managed to disprove God's existence, and no religious person has managed to prove God's existence, at least, not via the scientific method, which is the only way skeptics will accept. Just think about that: after everything the human race has accomplished throughout history, not one person has been able to prove or disprove the existence of God. I think that serves as proof that it is very, very hard.
I really don't think it's hard to disprove the existence of a divine creator. I mean, it's pretty much been done. The biggest problem is that both sides of the debate are too arrogant to look at what is presented to them from the other side. Granted, the side that believes God is real doesn't have any quantifiable evidence and rely solely on faith and personal interpretation, while the side that doesn't believe in God holds all of the tests, findings, and facts in their hands. There is a big difference between faith and science, since faith doesn't require any proof, just belief, whereas science is a process, using extrapolation, theory, hypothesis, and testing to either credit or discredit the subject of study. This is why a lot of Fundamentalist Christians deny science, especially when it threatens a belief they have, no matter how ridiculous that belief is.
To me, it's MUCH harder to prove God's existence, than to disprove it.