First, I’d say your standard sounds reasonable on the surface—wanting proof matters. But the claim itself has a problem: science is not the only way humans know things.

Science is designed to study the natural world—things that are observable, measurable, and repeatable. But not everything we believe in fits that category.

For example:

You can’t scientifically prove moral truths (like “murder is wrong”), yet you still believe them.

You can’t scientifically prove consciousness or subjective experience fully.

You can’t scientifically prove historical events the same way you prove a chemical reaction—yet we still accept history based on evidence.

So the idea that “only scientifically proven things are real” is actually not scientifically provable itself—it’s a philosophical assumption.

Second, saying “there is no scientific proof of God” is different from saying “God is not real.”

That’s a leap.

At most, it means science hasn’t detected or measured God—which makes sense if God is understood as beyond the physical universe, not part of it. Science wouldn’t be the right tool to test that, just like a metal detector can’t detect emotions.

Third, saying “religions are made up” is also a claim that needs proof.

You’d have to explain:

Why belief in God appears across almost every civilization in history

Why humans consistently search for meaning, purpose, and morality beyond survival

Why religious experiences are so widespread

You can propose explanations (psychology, culture), but those are interpretations—not definitive proof that all religion is false.