The type and quality of the evidence required for high confidence in a claim is inextricably tied to the specifics of the claim. For example, the claim vampires, biologically distinct from humans, are real would involve more than eye-witness testimony. It would naturally require science-vetted evidence of metabolic changes in alleged vampires or a forensic examination of videos in which vampires appear to be flying. You can’t simply are “Who are we to demand that a creature superior to ourselves would leave evidence that we would normally expect to find?“, then believe in the absence of that evidence.
How much more so for a God who is allegedly in the room with each of us, and who wants a personal relationship with us. Are we really going to suggest “Humans can not require that the evidence for an omnipresent and personal God be as we would expect of an omnipresent and personal God“? Do you rationally tell the person expecting a God so defined to simply step visibly and audibly out of the shadows to accomplish an actual immediate and direct personal relationship “You’re asking for too much“?