Resolved: God is more likely than not to exist.

I shall continue my opening arguments as in accords with the rules then I shall go into my rebuttals against my opponent's Zero Net argument. Contention 3: TA Arguement Here we can observe Saint Thomas Aquinas's theory on teleologic which is the ultamate causes of objects or actions in relation to their ends. This is from the 5th of Thomas Aquinas's theories explaining the existance of God. His theory is bellow. 1. If teleology exists, then an ordering intellect exists.2. Teleology exists.3. Therefore, an ordering intellect exists. Here for the first part we may see that teleos exists on the basis that there must be intentionality and this exists in the mind. Hence one can see that if teleology truely exists then there must be intellect for it to be grounded to in the end. For this I site Edward Feser who states, "Where goal-directness is associated with consciousness, as it is in us, there is no mystery. A builder builds a house, and he is able to do so because the form of the house exists in his intellect because it is instantiated in a concrete particular object. And of course, the materials that will take on that form also exist already, waiting to take it on. " [1] So ask yourself, does teleology exist? Obvious, does the heart beat and pump blood because it just happens? No, it has a valid purpose of pumping blood to keep you alive. Without teleology there would be no purpose. We can see that from everyday occurance by using this. I mean how else are we to say that a carborator needs replaced if it does not have a purpose? When we observe other things that are inorganic like the Nitrogen and Water Cycle we can see that they too have purpose and are thus teleological by nature. [2] We can see that since all teleology has to be grounded to a singel being in the universe. It is obvious that this high being has nothing else higher than it and is thus the greatest being in the universe which it would make sense to call this said being God. Last year scientists have actually found ripples in time and space continum. I believe that it actually helps prove the existance of God than disproves it. We can see after the Big Bang there was gravitational strips in the universe that ripped it appart in seconds. [3] We can actually see that a very very simplified version of this is in the Bible. 6. Everything that had a beginning in time has a cause. 7. The universe had a beginning in time. 8. Therefore the universe had a cause. 9. The only thing that could have caused the universe is god. 10. Therefore, god exists. [4]For the 6th premise we have already found that is true, so let's move on to the next premise. Now for the 7th premise Ross writes this in support. "By definition, time is that dimension in which cause-and-effect phenomena take place. No time, no cause and effect. If time's beginning is concurrent with the beginning of the universe, as the space-time theorem says, then the cause of the universe must be some entity operating in a time dimension completely independent of and preexistent to the time dimension of the cosmos. This conclusion is powerfully important to our understanding of who god is and who or what god isn't. It tells us that the Creator is transcendent, operating beyond the dimensional limits of the universe. " [5]Here we can see that there has to be an entity controlling time and something had to come before time. That the entirety of everything had another dimension and this God was in another dimension and created the universe and all the laws of physics that we are still yet to even begin to comprehend. He later to go on to further back this up by providing Biblical verses and stating that it has to be that God has another time dimension and this is one of the reasons that we do not have concrete proof of him yet as we have yet to be able to travel in other dimensions. [5]RebuttalsI enjoy space science as I'm sure my opponent does which is why he provided this argument. The only issue is that the argument is false. Why's that you may ask? Because of the universe's structure. Zero Total Energy Implies this equation:+1-1=0 (I'm using 1 to have it make a little more sense for some of these arguments) The only issue here is that this theory has no room for universal exspansion. The theory also imposes that the universe can last forever on the basis that there is little to zero energy used. [6]2nd Law of Thermodynamics- Ethropy of an isolated system, in this case the universe, that is not at equalibrium will move towards equillibrium over time.3rd Law of Thermodynamics- As temperature approaches Absolute Zero the Entropy becomes more constant. [7]What this means for this debate is that if my opponent is correct on this theory there would be no energy movement. We can already see that the universe is not at equilibrium as my opponent seems to think. If we observe the works of Stephen Hawking one can see that the universe is growing and exspanding, if we were at equalibrium then we should see no exspansion. In his book, A Brief History of Time, Stephen Hawking even addressed this issue by showing the following scenrios and equations. +2-1=1, Universe is exspanding, current universe. +1-1=0, Universe has reached equalibrium as matter and gravity are now equal. +1-2=0, Universe has began to start to shrink back to the Big Crunch as Gravity excedes matter. In this case we can see that due to BGV and the Radio background that my opponent brought up in his last round we can see that the universe is exspanding. With that said it would be practically impossible for this theory to be true, because it requires that the universe at equalibrium. It also ignores that things can be hotter, or sometimes, colder than temperature. A Kugleblitz occurs when the Temperature of an object gets so hot to the point that they create a black hole. There are several known Kugleblitzs in the universe and showing this can show an outright interesting factor as energy of an object can go to the point of nothing to the Big Bang energy levels itself. [8] . http://www.youtube.com...Remember that since God is transcendent and that of a mind that he opperates outside of the relm of spacetime as I have shown in my previous round. Sources1. Edward Feser, "Teleology: A Shopper's Guide," Philosophia Christi 12 (2010): 1572. David S. Oderberg, "Teleology: Inorganic and Organic," in A. M. Gonz"lez (ed. ), Contemporary Perspectives on Natural Law(Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008): 259-793. (. http://www.cnn.com...)4. (Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos (Colorado Springs: Navpress, 1995), p. 14. )5. ( Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, p. 76. )6. (Edward P. Tryon, "Is the Universe a Vacuum Fluctuation? ", Nature, vol. 246, p.396–397, 1973. ) 7. ( . http://www.icr.org...) 8. ( . http://www.fromquarkstoquasars.com...)