God most likely exists

Ok first of all, thermodynamics is a branch of physics concerned with heat and temperature, it has nothing to do with whether our universe should be orderly or not. Second of all, billions of years ago, life was synthesized in tidal pools by chance, although it was unlikely, there is a lot evidence backing it up. On the other hand, what is the evidence that God exists? Where did he come from? How did he come to be? Well, we'll get to this later. When you said "First of all, the scientist did not explain how exactly molecules just randomly decided to replicate", that doesn't make every scientist wrong, it either means that the particular scientist you were talking to didn't explain it, or he was incompetent. So that argument, is therefor invalid. Also, molecules don't "randomly decide to replicate", that's not how it works. DNA molecules replicate because the double helix is unwound and each strand acts as a template for the next strand. Bases are matched to synthesize the new partner strands. DNA replication is the process of producing two identical replicas from one original DNA molecule. They do not simply "randomly decide to replicate". Although you are indeed correct that natural selection works with what it already has, what it already has includes genetic mutations. So, with the genetic mutations provided, they evolved into single celled organisms, and with the genetic mutations with those organisms they evolved into fish, and so on and so forth. I saw your argument that said that if those creatures evolved, then how do we still have the creatures that they supposedly evolved from? Well, natural selection doesn't have to pick just one type of an organism. Why, if natural selection picked something with a favorable mutation, can't it also pick the original. Just because a mutation is fit for the world, doesn't mean that the original isn't. That is why we have different creatures. On your argument about HGPS, you are correct, a lot of mutations, most mutations actually, are not, in fact favorable. So when those mutations happened to the original organisms on Earth, they died out, taking the bad mutations with them. This, though, does not mean that some mutations can be good. For instance, there is the CCR5 mutation, which makes humans virtually immune to HIV. But does this mean that humans without this gene will die out? No. So, while a genetic mutation does result in the loss of information, there are so many others without the mutation that it is improbable beyond improbability that all of the people with the typical DNA patterns would die out. "For molecules-to-man evolution to happen, there needs to be a gain in new information within the organism"s genetic material. For instance, for a single-celled organism, such as an amoeba, to evolve into something like a cow, new information (not random base pairs, but complex and ordered DNA) would need to develop over time that would code for ears, lungs, brain, legs, etc.", that was one of your arguments. My rebuttal to this is that obviously, this didn't happen in a few days, a few years, or even a few hundred years. It took billions of years for amoeba and other single celled organisms to evolve into creatures as advanced as cows. At first, one may have developed the mutation for a basic ear, and then generations after, another could have developed mutations for the prototypes of other modern body parts, and then it eventually (after billions of years), developed into beings with ears, legs, lungs, etcetera. So, as I have spent almost half my characters countering your points, I will use the rest to bring up my own points. The chances of an all knowing, all powerful being existing, controlling all of us, is ridiculous. There is little to no evidence suggesting that god exists, and yet you criticize the few holes (which I, in return proved weren't actually holes) that evolution has. Well, your Bible contains a story in which an elderly man constructs an ark and then rounds up two of each animal to survive on the boat. This is obviously not true because that would mean that all animals are after that, besides the original two, would be inbred and would most likely have genetic mutations and die out. This didn't happen, as we still have animals. Even humans would probably be dead or extremely rare and most of the time misconfigured, as there were only approximately 8 people on the ark, most of them related. Yet another story in the Bible says that a woman was impregnated without coming close to sperm. Now this story is either made up, or Mary actually wasn't a virgin. I feel, as a believer in evolution and the big bang theory, that it is not my duty to prove to creationists that evolution and the big bang theory is real, as they already have undeniable evidence to back them up, but your duty to give me solid evidence that god exists. You base your belief in god on a supposed lack of evidence in the evolutionary theory, when in reality, there is no lack of evidence, plus new evidence is found all the time. Where is your so-called god's evidence? There is none, that is my point. The best that most creationists have is personal accounts of people claiming that they saw god in a near death experience. Well their word is as good as a man who claims that he's the third coming of Jesus. So in conclusion for this round of our debate, I would like to say that although the evolutionary theory may have some mysteries that haven't been solved yet, it is almost bullet proof. Evolution is to the point where it has enough evidence to where it is almost fact. Creationism and the idea of god have little or no evidence. Thank you.