I see. Testable theories cannot be proven because the accuser lacks in faith. I wouldn't consider that justified, just down right pre-denial. A man who believes in God will test a theory and assume it as proven, simply because he believes. The same goes with one who does not believe.
Testable hypotheses/claims can be proven or disproven which in relation to religion would be claims of divine intervention. Untestable hypotheses/claims can't be proven or disproven such as the claim that God exists without any of the peripheral claims.
In science great efforts are made to minimise the influence of bias and if you don't get the answer you want then tough luck. If you try and fudge the results then usually it won't take long for you to be found out, especially when others try to reproduce your results.
Don't try and apply the poor investigative standards of the relgion to science.
Of course, your prayer example could also justify the existence of God, if one prays for good fortune and it happens upon him then it could be considered a justification for the existence of God, though most would agree that it is a natural anomoly that happens often.
This experiment proved that prayer was inneffective at reducing complications following surgery. It doesn't prove that God doesn't exists unless Gods existance is dependent on him answering prayers and nobody knows if this is the case.
Everyone has their own ways of explaining something, most just chose to follow one side, rather than looking at the whole picture however.
Wishy washy nonsense. The reason why people utilise the scientific method is because it works and is the best system we currently have available to us. Alternative methods such as making things up and attributing it to supernatural agents didn't work despite its popularity in the past and continueing popularity now when people really should know better.
Though, unicorns and fairies were meant to exist as separate fantastical entites, God can exist without being considered "supernatural" and an "entity", yet a certain faith is still required to consume this thought, and many (not all) people are not able to fathom something greater than themselves.
Insults and special pleading. You''ll need to do better than that
Asking for evidence seems to me to be a trust issue. Where you lack faith and trust in the Earth and the motion that carries our bodies through space and time. Of course, this is a naturalist view point, and can also be applied to the Opposition as well.
Its called skepticism which without a person is little more than a credulous fool. I've been skeptical of religious claims since I was a young child because quite frankly they are generally ridiculous.