It is most probable that a god exists.

Contingency ArgumentP5) The explanation of the unverse[sic] is due to an external cause.P6) The external cause must be spaceless, timeless, immaterial, omnipotent, and personal.Counter: The Big Bang is the current scientific explanation for the existence of the universe in its present form.Evolution is the current scientific explanation of mankind in its present form.Science sees a bottom-up view of everything, while religion takes a top-down view of everything.Science sees simple atoms combining inside of stars to form more complex atoms, which explode to create more complex atoms, which created earth which GREW to its present form.Science needs small things to begin. Religion needs big things to begin. Small things are obvious and present in today's world. Big things are not.P7) If god existed, he would at least have the traits of being spaceless, timeless, immaterial, omnipotent, and personal.Why not a UFO? Why not a time traveler? Why does it have to be something bigger and more extraordinary than what we know of already?Every advance known to man is believed to be magic by preceding generations. A personal God would be sociable and walk with his people. He does not, Principle of Sufficent[sic] ReasonIt is unclear why my opponent makes this statement.The Universe is Not Necessary This is a point of philosophy, and is not testable by modern science. The religious typically take the other standpoint, that the Earth was necessary for the creation of mankind, which was necessary because God was bored.Something cannot from nothing “At this time, the apparent asymmetry of matter and antimatter in the visible universe is one of the greatest unsolved problems in physics[1].” Simply because we do not yet know the reason does not mean God is necessary. This is called the God of the Gaps. Many scientists are asking this question, and at some later time we might know for certain. Not now.The Need for a Necessary CauseMy opponent stated “The universe didn't come from nothing. The universe isn't eternal or necessary.” It is know that the standard laws of physics do not apply at the time of the big bang. What happened before the big bang? It is speculation at best.Ontological ArgumentP1: It is possible that a maximally great being exists.Why. Einstien's theory of General Relativity restricts all beings to the speed of light. This means that a god would have be based on the moon to have meaningful contact with humans. The nearest planet is 13 light years away, or as fast as man can travel, 10.72 mi/s, 338065920 mi/yr, 17377 years away. This is longer than religion, so a god must have evolved on the earth. Which he did.P2: If it is possible that a maximally great being exists, then a maximally great being exists in some possible world.This depends on the multiverse which is outside of mainstream science[2].Possible WorldDepends on Ontological Argument, which I contest the validity of.Moral ArgumentP1) If god does not exist, then objective moral values and duties do not ext[sic].This is tabula rasa, meaning blank slate[3] in Latin. This is the epistemological theory that individuals are born without built-in mental content.This idea is largely discarded due to the complex interaction of nature and nurture[4].What is nature? That of primal savages. Do primal savages exist? Yes. Therefore the morality of primal savages exists, and is valid in that context.Now take the primal savages to a city. They are used to a clan of ~50 people. Now they must content with 250,000 people. The caveman methods of dealing with people no longer work. So a new system must be put in place. This is nurture. The collective wisdom of people that are used to living together in large groups, for how the individual can survive and flourish in the context of the large group.Then take the cultured Europeans, and place them in the midwest, cowboy country. Their moral code changes dramatically. Every man for himself.God and Objective Morality'An objective moral prescriber[sic] is necessary for objective moral prescriptions, and an objective moral standard is necessary for objective moral values. God is a maximally great being, and since it's intuitively greater to be the standard of moral perfection rather than exemplify it, then it follows that God would be the moral standard were he to exist, which makes him uniquely qualified in issuing commands. Therefore, God is the most plausible and least arbitrary standard, necessary for moral reality.' -ApeironAssault, sexual offenses, and robbery, are the most common violent crimes. These are the instinctual reactions of a primal savage mind to his environment. These do not work, and so are condemned by all developed cultures.There has been no standard moral code beyond the basics. Woman’s rights, gay rights, slavery, circumcision, sabbath, these are all items that religion has gotten wrong.[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...[2]http://en.wikipedia.org...[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...[4] http://en.wikipedia.org...