Some where deep down we know that finding the reasons behind our own existence has a crucial link with our own future.
In the rude scientific sense one may like to argue that such a question has no meaning if the theory offers an indeterminate answer for its own creator. Which means as a creator if you ask the question then you must know the answer .. no theory can answer that.All the theory says is I dont know.or it says either ways.
Imagine someone all alone doing all his calculations and hardwork to create this World.Some day he might himself ask this question to himself "Who created me ?" Since this semantic possibility can not ruled out we say that Creator must be having the answer in a way which No theory is allowed to hold the complete answer ...However it doenst mean that no communication has been made.
#What if the explantion requires real time as a prerequisite for proper communication?
Which means unless the creator himself comes to explain what he means .. The knowledge may decay.
Thus all the confusion and debate is due to the supposed absence of Creator anywhere today.
Probably all the answers depends on who is explaining you and in what mood. Such is the complexity of the Ultimate Answer.
Interestingly if an ordinary tries to imagine the Higher Dimensions .. he or she may fail unless the expert guide is in the right mood.
The knowledge today is becoming more difficult to be completely represented on paper.
This is no news as the physical understanding has shown dependecies on the Carrier of the Information.
Thus the answer to your question :
?What evidence would you need to consider ?God? as factual??
There exists some evidence but it can no more be be distributed on paper.It is known or in a state of to-be-known for some reasons which is more than superstitious.