There is more evidence that God does not exist, than there to is prove that he does.

Thanks for your speedy response. I will first address the problems you had with my argument, before moving on to another. You claim that The Big Bang Theory is a scientific fact, well actually, The Big Bang Theory is just that... a theory. It is widely accepted and makes logical sense, but it can only ever be applied to the observable Universe and what we have so far learned. You are also correct that my theory about "the death of a star" or "implosion of a galaxy" has no evidence to support it, but it is a lot more plausible than your theory of a designer. I see that you have jumped to the conclusion that since I am questioning the existence of a God, I must be an Atheist. I am not. I do not deny the possibility of God. I am arguing that there is not enough evidence the support his existence. I'd like to go back to your opening argument if I may. You asked yourself, "Why must God be this designer", then answered, "because that's the most logical thing to believe". I think a better way to state this would be... "God is a temporary answer that is accepted by some, until definitive evidence can be found to prove his existence is false" . Not only is this statement true for the origins of the Universe, but it's also true for any form of human or natural behaviour that religion attributes to God. You included some quotes from famous scientists including Alex Vilenkin and John Gribbin. These quotes however are not relevant to my argument in any way since they are discussing facts available to us only in the observable Universe, without any thought as to what is beyond it, which was the basis of my whole argument. I would like to repeat one of my statements. Could you please provide me with your thoughts about it - "Considering that you cannot definitively prove the existence of God, you must first eliminate all the scientifically plausible explanations before your "designer" argument can be accepted as fact." I hope that I have made my point clear that you cannot simply claim that the universe is designed, as you only have the information currently available to you from which to construct your arguments. Before you can state with any certainty that the universe was created, you would need to be able to travel faster than the speed of light to access the potential evidence. And we both know that this is currently impossible. Moving on from the "designer" argument, I would like to ask you a question... do you believe that God is omnipotent? I ask because many religions believe their God is omnipotent, meaning he is all powerful and can do anything. I think that one of the main reasons for doubting the existence of God is that, although he is omnipotent, he does nothing to stop the terrible things that occur on our planet. Things such as floods, volcanic eruptions and earthquakes are just a few examples. An all powerful God could surely prevent these things from happening. This leads to only three possible results - 1. God is not omnipotent. 2. God does not care. 3. God does not exist. If the answer is number one or two, what is the purpose of God? If the answer is only number two, it would almost make him a psychopath who enjoys watching people suffer, which would lead me to ask... why would anyone want a God? Therefore the only sensible answer is number three... God does not exist. I want to add that you cannot simply say this is God's Plan, as this provides me with no evidence at all. Thank you.