CON "I don't know" vs PRO "God did it"

It is very cute the way you are using big boy debate words! Mine is not a Prima Facie argument. I have not claimed "There is not God". You are projecting. I never mentioned life coming from non-life. The reason I never mentioned it is because I am not a biologist and I don"t know how life came about and neither do you. Your maggot story is a beautiful portrayal of how science works"twisted to attempt to fit your narrative. Abiogenesis is not a Theory. It is a hypothesis. We have continued to learn more and more about how life starts by study. The more we study, The more questions we have. The more questions we answer the more our knowledge moves forward. <"Science! I did not say mutualism is not evolution. I said YOUR argument about how their relationship came about is NOT evolution. I also said that it would only take you a few hours to study the evolution if these fish and then your post would not be complete ignorant babble. Now to the Cosmological Argument. I am no Philosopher but I will try" P1 Everything that exists has a cause of existence. Explanation: For my idea of God to be true, I need this to be true so I shall simply assert it without evidence. P2 The universe exists and thus, Must have a cause. Explanation: See P1 P3 Because nothing cannot produce something, That cause must be an outside force. Explanation: The only way to explain how a God could exist in a universe where everything must have a cause is if I place God outside my construct. Genius. P4 That outside force is God Explanation: WOW! POOF God. Who could have seen that twist coming? P5 It thus follows that God created the universe. Flawless! (outside all the flaws. ) >>The rest of your arguments are simply a bunch of bare claims with no evidence to back them up. For example, You didn't even mention my argument from motion proving God, You just laughed it off and said that it was too stupid<< Two things about this gem of a paragraph: 1. I make no arguments after I shredded your Cosmological double speak. 2. Your example is not an argument without evidence, It is a complaint that I ignored your Argument from Motion. LOL! Arrogant Questions for Con: 1. Since you yourself said you don't know how the universe came to exist, What makes you so sure it isn't God? I am not sure. I have not claimed to be so. I don"t know. 2. Would you agree that it is possible that there is a God? If so, Then what is keeping you from wanting to look at the evidence I have provided? I do not know if a God is possible. You presented NO evidence. Do you know what that word means? 3. Is it more probable that a God exists, Or that all of these ridiculous probabilities came to happen in sequence resulting in this universe with such complexity? How do YOU measure the probability of something outside the universe? Outside the natural world? 4. What has more credibility? A theory, Or 4 scientific laws? If the big bang is a theory that contradicts 4 scientific laws, Which is true? If you can prove the Big Bang is not how it happened, You can win the nobel Prize. I do not see the evidence you seem to, But I am not an astro physicist. 5. Do you believe that the universe had a beginning? If so, Then is it more believable that an Omnicient, Omnipotent, Intelligent designer created it, Or that it miraculously came from nothing? I do not know how the universe began and neither do you. I am just not so arrogant as to assert that I am a philosophy, Biology and astrophysics expert to prove my point. I don"t know and neither do you.