The KCA is False

IntroductionIt seems as if this is going to be short and sweet, as Pro did not give me much valuable content to work with in the last round. Why The Cause Must Be PersonalIn order for there to be no need for a personal cause, my opponent has to refute my argument that a personal cause is the only plausible explanation. My opponent completely ignored my argument for a personal cause. My argument for a personal cause does show that a personal cause is needed, and it went completely unaddressed. The universal wave-function argument does not preclude a God, or my argument for a personal cause. Regardless, my opponent's argument actually backfires on him, because the wave-function of the universe necessitates a personal, sentient creator due to Orchestrated Objective Reduction!Universal Orch-OrRoger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff devised a theory that actually has made many predictions that have turned out to be true. This theory is called Orchestrated Objective Reduction[1]. This theory demonstrates that a self-collapsing wave-function is actually a conscious experience. There is scientific evidence to support this theory[2]. Now, what about the wave-function collapse of the universe? It had to have been self-collapsing, because there are no particles outside of physical reality which could collapse the wave-function. This means that Pro's argument for the universal wave-function of the universe actually proves God's existence, because only a conscious experience could account for the collapse of the wave-function of the universe. Quentin Smith's ArgumentMy opponent misunderstands the cannonball analogy. It shows that that even if there was no a beginning state, that does not preclude God:"Smith must: (i) Deny PCE; (ii) Deny that the explosion caused the sequence of cannonball states; or (iii) Retain PCE, but claim that the explosion provides an additional explanation of the sequence of cannonball states. Presumably, Smith does not want to take either options (i) or (ii). If he takes option (iii), however, then the theist can claim that this is the sort of additional explanation that God provides for the existence of the universe. Further, insofar as the explosion is essential to providing a complete explanation of the cannonball states in the open interval (12:01pm-12:02pm), the theist could argue that God is essential to providing a complete explanation of our universe, even though the universe contains no beginning point." - Robin CollinsMy argument for a personal cause argues just that, and my opponent completely ignored it. Also, I concede my opponent's argument with regards to an actual infinity. This was only marginal support for my argument, and it is not necessary for the rebuttal to Quentin Smith's argument to go through.Conclusion. I showed why a personal cause is necessary, and this argument went uncontested. I showed why the wave-function of the universe actually demonstrates God's existence (Orch-Or). I showed why Quentin Smith's argument does not preclude GodA long winded response is not necessary. The resolution has been negated. Sources[1] http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] https://sbs.arizona.edu...[3] http://www.infidels.org...