There is no evidence for a god.

Thank you con, I am not sure if you realize this but if a book created nearly 2,000 years ago has a few statements that came out to be true after we researched and verified them does not make it a history book. History- Study of past events: the branch of knowledge that records and analyzes past events. There are many scientists that are religious and have not been able to come to the conclusion that there was a Big Flood, that humans co existed with dinosaurs, light came before the sun, and that the bible says a woman came from a mans rib. All of these things are false unless you say well there is a god that is above all but that can't be true because to have an all powerful god, all knowing, everywhere at once, all doing, and infinite it could not create the universe because to be everywhere at once you can not create the universe and be within it because the universe has time and god is above space and time this also pokes a hole in the infinite part because to be within space and time would mean that we could analyze and discover god because to be within the universe you would be made of atoms and to be a biblical god you must be above the universe's laws yet an all knowing god but also an all good god cannot know evil and yet be all good and to be everywhere at once god would have complete control over hell and what is happening at every point in time. Now if god is all knowing and all powerful can god create a boulder it cannot lift? If yes he is not all powerful if no he is not all knowing. Now I would like to point out for the Bible to be a history book it would have to be 100% correct and verifiable something that we all know is not accomplishable. People can use parts of the bible as evidence for battles now that we can verify the statements in them as like you said ancient battles. I would challenge them being in the bible though because at the time of them being written the person or persons witnessed the city with many other people "witnesses" it is the equivalent to our reporters of today if they have witnessed and were there with many other witnesses to the decimation of a city and then we go and verify it we would accept it as fact and it would be written down in a way that would be read by the masses. But if that same reporter came out and said that it has talked to god and knows how the universe was created by this god the reporter would be dismissed as crazy like the writers of the bible should have been but it was written 2,000 years ago by unverifiable desert nomads. The reason genesis is not able to be used in an argument besides the fact that the way the same bible defines gods trait would make him impossible is that Evolution is true the earth was not created in 6 days and the universe is continuously expanding and is billions of years older than the earth. Your understanding of The Big Bang Theory is incorrect you stated that The Big Bang created the first atom that is not the theory the theory is that The Big Bang happened from a small cluster of atoms that all ready were there they believe them to be the Higgs atom the Higgs particle is a boson with no spin, electric charge, nor color charge. It is also very unstable, decaying into other particles almost immediately. This atom/particle was discovered on march 13th 2013. Lastly I do believe that you have faith that the bible is the word of god but to use the book that someone says is the word of god as proof is not acceptable it is like me saying I shoot lasers out of my eyes I will not show you but here is a book about how I did shoot lasers out of my eyes. I challenge Con to find some evidence other than a book written by men who think god told them what to write. Thank you for this debate and please go check out http://science.howstuffworks.com... to learn more about The Big Bang theory and not have misconceptions about it.