Atheism is illogical

The Kalam cosmological argument states: Whatever begins to exist has a cause. The universe began to exist. Therefore: The universe has a cause. From the conclusion of the initial syllogism, a further premise and conclusion based upon ontological analysis of the properties of the cause: The universe has a cause. If the universe has a cause, then an uncaused, personal Creator of the universe exists, who sans the universe is beginningless, changeless, immaterial, timeless, spaceless and enormously powerful; Therefore: An uncaused, personal Creator of the universe exists, who sans the universe is beginningless, changeless, immaterial, timeless, spaceless and enormously powerful. ----- Atheism is mathematically impossible. Without God we get a regress in infinite causality. Meaning, we must accept infinite history, which is synonymous with the logic of saying everyone has a mother, but there is no first mother. We have history, but no first history. We have events, but no first event. We have intelligent beings but no first intelligent beings. We must accept that there is no beginning. There is no end. There are infinite you's, me's, and everyone else. There always has been a you. You were, you are, and you will be again, and infinitely into the past and into the future. There was no first you and no last you. There is no first or last anything. Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Neither? This is paradoxial, illogical, unacceptable comprehensively, and 100% impossible mathematically. ---- Atheism is scientifically impossible. The fact that anything exists or came from anything at all suggests someone beyond physics, mathematics, and philosophy must exist. Otherwise we must accept paradoxes that are beyond mythological in nature from around the board. The universe/reality is finite or infinite. The door is open or shut. There is no in between. If the universe/reality is finite we must accept that the universe/reality exists literally inside of nothing. This is the equivalent of believing a basketball is sitting there inside of nothing. The entire concept is a logical fallacy. We must always ask,"But what is outside of the ball?" To say,"nothing" creates a full, 100% paradox. The point? For something to exist inside of nothing is completely uncomprehendable and illogical in a finite reality. If the universe is infinite, we create a number (beyond measure) of paradoxes. In a carnal, physical world, the idea of an infinite "thing" is inconceivable. There are no " infinite things. No physical thing goes on forever. In our reality everything has a beginning. Everything has an end. Even if we blindly forsake logic, physics, and mathemstics, and declare the universe/reality is infinite, we create many paradoxes including parallel realities, infinite you's, me's, infinite everythings. Everything that has happened has happened before and has never not been happening. We create a regress in infinite everything. Everything exists, and not only does it exist, infinite everythings exist infinitely. -- How does this apply to the concept of God? In a paradoxial finite universe/reality, we must ask who/what is outside of the universe/reality. If it is finite, logically something must exist outside of it. But for this to be true, we cause a regress of "infinite what's outside of thats?" This concludes that the universe/reality must be infinite. If it is, all things exist. In infinite space and time, in theory, beings greater than us came to be, then greater than them, and greater than them, and even greater and greater infinitely. At some point we reach a singularity in which beings/a being of omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent consciousness and being "is". A singularity occurs at some point that puts forth a "master of reality as we know it. And in infinite space and time, this conscious being has always existed and cannot ever not exist within an eternal reality. We can accept an omnipotent being through darwinian means in infinite space and time or we can accept an omnipotent being that "is" beyond physics, time, or our reality all together in the way that a computer programmer exists outside of the constructs of the programs or virtual realities he creates. He is beyond its laws, and is in no way governed, in being, by his creation's rules. We cannot conceptualize the idea of an infinite "thing". Or can we? There is only one way known to man to project an infinite reality without causing a paradox. A loop with the construct of a program. Example: This game's world could go on infinitely. http://youtu.be... What is a program loop? http://whatis.techtarget.com...