God probably exists

My opponent seems to be a little hasty in his final statements. I didn't avoid his arguments; in fact I answered them the best way I knew how. Con states, "First off, you honesty dropped mine. Second, I 'dropped' your argument because the logic behind it could be defeated using the rebuttal above it." I did no such thing. I stated that I could take his watchmaker argument to defend my position that a "designer" is still behind a watch. A designer is also behind a lightbulb. Complexity lends support to a designer is my rebuttal which Con failed to refute. The only other statement Con makes is, "You are taking traits of things and falsely putting them to other things. " How so? If there is evidence of design and complexity in nature, why wouldn't there be a designer for man? Again, Con never answers this question. Con states, "Ruck avoid my rebuttals on the Fine-Tuning argument( There really is one 'setting' and that the universe could be one of many.)." I did no such thing. I stated, "Alright, well if the constants are changed, then life would be impossible. The reason there is only "one setting" as you put it, is because outside of this one setting life would collapse." http://books.google.com...... That is my rebuttal and my explanation to Con's "one-setting idea." If Con has a better explanation and rebuttal he should have stated it then. He never did. Hawking is in agreement with me on this point at least. Con says that my moral argument is a fallacy without explaining why. Con never answered my question of examples where genetic kinship or reciprocal advantage don't apply. My three examples were never refuted. I submit to the readers and voters that my Hell argument was never answered in the last round which seems to indicate that Con concedes that point. Con said, "Ruck also misunderstands the point of my Gangnam Style arguement. Note the wiki link. That link shoes a somewhat little known fallacy where people see patterns in meanless data. That's what the Bible is." Is it meaningless data? Con never backs his statement with any evidence or reasoning. Is the stock market data meaningless to the economist? No. Are legal codes meaningless data to the lawyer? No. Just because a man doesn't understand something, or isn't interested in something doesn't make the material meaningless. My Biblical example with Israel wasn't even discussed when it cleary states they'd get their land back. Con ends with, "Ruck had the BOP. He failed. Somethings existance is unlikey if evidence cant be found. Thats why I dont need a argument. In a sense, I already prove my end of the bargin." That is a fallacy. There must be some reasoning and explanation why my arguments show a lack of evidence when most of my points were glossed over. Second, even the skeptic needs an argument why God doesn't exist, otherwise there wouldn't be a debate. For example, the reason everyone agrees Santa Claus doesn't exist is:Parents admit to buying the gifts. This statement shows some reasoning and evidence to disprove Santa Claus. Moreover, my point is that Con needs an explanation to refute my arguments and he never really answers them. If "God probably doesn't exist" as Con argues, then he must offer some reasoning and or evidence to qualify this statement. The purpose of a debate is to offer reasons and evidence which Con purposefully avoids. I shall end with a poem: A man came to a Barber To cut his hair The man started to say God is so merciful that I found a way to express myself in gleeful. The Barber said "I don't believe in God". The man asked: "why don't you believe in God"? Barber replied, 'because God doesn't exist'. The man said "he does". Baber replied "he doesn't". Then the man said "no more argument, You will find the way one day". The man just went out Noticed a man with long dirty hair came back to Barber and said "The Barber doesn't exist" "What! I just cut your hair"! Barber exclaimed "If you do then this man wouldn't have long dirty hair". Barber said "he needs to come to me to cut his hair". The man replied: "Exactly! the same way You have to look for God to find his existance, And ask yourself where to find his essence". The Barbar didn't have an answer Just said " You are so clever." Vote fairly.