The philosophical hypothesis that spiderman exists would have already been rejected before going through the stages of falsification because there already exists enough evidence to reject the hypothesis completely. Statistically speaking, the hypothesis that spiderman exists would have proven to be extremely, and I mean extremely, unlikely. However, taking into account that the philosophical hypothesis would have already been rejected, there wouldn't be a need for falsifying the hypothesis as it's already been rejected.
The general hypothesis that there exists a God provides a very strong foundation for a philosophical hypothesis, enough to provide countless ongoing debates on the subject. The statistical and emperical evidence for the hypothesis would not be as strong, and hence the stance of the scientific community in continuously researching, presenting (and falsifying) alternative hypotheses that do not include "God made everything". However, because there is still a philosophical debate on the hypothesis that there is a God, it's simply not a case that science has proven God doesn't exist.
Sorry, but which God are you referring to?
Aken, Aker, Ammit, Amunet, Anubis, Anuket, Apophis, Bast, Heget, Horus, Isis, Osiris, Ra, Set?... or maybe Baldr, Loki, Odin, Thor, Freyr?... howabout Tlaloc, Xupe-Totec, Tezcatlipoca, Quetzalcoatal or Mictlantecuhti?... maybe the inuit deities liek Agloolik, Akna, Anguta, Pinga or Qailertetang?... or Northern Territory aboriginal? Altjira the Arrente sky god who created the earth? Karora the creator...
and so on...
There are thousands, probably tens of thousands of Gods. All different and each trying to explain a complicated world to pre-scientific and pre-industrial societies
It's self-evident that for your God to be the only God (as your God claims in his book) then none of those other Gods can exist.
And what that all demonstrates is not that a supreme deity or multiple deities exist or even that there is a good philosophical case for believing that god exists, but that
the need for explanation exists and in the absence of any other option (no science or rudimentary science) a human or animal-like intelligence is assumed to be required.
It's the very ubiquitous nature of religion
in so many different forms that shows that it's a human construct not 'God-given'. Unless of course, you accept that The Bible and Koran are wrong.