Existace of God

I accept the argument and this is my first debate on this site so I hope I do a decent job presenting myself and I look forward to more debates in the future. Just to quickly clarify so we don't digress into semantics, I will define god as the Judeo-Christian god of the bible. The task most atheists face is proving a negative or theists claiming the burden of proof lies on the atheist/skeptic. My opponents first point is 'My first point will be that science has proven that not god existed but energy exist and that it is a constant' While I agree energy cannot be created or destroyed I must point out this does not swing the debate in his favour. The success of science. This highlights the absence of god, in actuality the absence of pros 'ever-constant personal creator' in everyday life. The natural sciences explore phenomenon's and mysteries every day yet fail to ever need to invoke a creator or appeal the mythical miracles which religions claim to have occurred. To claim god exists is to make a scientific claim with no actual tangible evidence to support this. While absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, I believe it is a question dodged my theists. Why has science progressed so far yet at no point ever needed to invoke the powers of higher being. As scientific knowledge increases, gods decreases into the impossibilities and 'holy books'. If theism were accurate or even plausible we would expect to see gods work and undeniable work in at least a few things. Even if I grant the theist a 'few' things I still am left with the skeptical statements of 'we don't know gods will'. The theory of evolution. My point is not to highlight that evolution disproves god but to link the implausibility of god in reference to evolution. A perfect creator capable of constructing the universe was an ideal claim 200 years ago, it made sense. If the Theory of evolution was not discovered before I was born or during my life time I would admittedly be swayed to the notion of a creator. The mechanism of evolution is the key to this point. Natural selection is a non-random process with high waste, high imperfections, a large percentage of death and entire special extinction. This process is what you would expect if in fact the process was unguided and completely natural. To link an imperfect system to a perfect god is to say the creator is a poor creator, a creator which is pleased with only 1% of species still surviving in an eternal struggle for existence. I think the plausibility of this is low, so low in fact is contradicts the idea of an 'intelligent designer'. Unless god is purposely trying to cover his tracks which I find Illogical, the only other thing I can conclude with is that the this process doesn't need and conveys of the implausibility of god existing and having any notable effect on our lives. Mind-body dualism. This is the claim that the mind can exist outside of the body or the brain. I am happy to switch between mind and soul as long as the general premise is kept constant. The illogical aspect of this is located primarily in science. This must be true for the biblical account to be true. This is one of most important areas of Christianity. Scientifically we must look at this rationally can a mind exist without a body? Can a person exist without actually being a physical body? These questions are very open but present a very obvious problem. Our minds are affected by the body it is interactive. Theists might make the claim this does nothing to prove the mind is not independent but it does present a problem that the loss of the body now leaves the soul in non-interactive area which is undefined and not proven. Not only that with the link between our conscious and our brain is not only interactive but through scientific discovery dependent on the brain. When the brain dies the conscious/mind ceases to exist. We can see this is brain damage after large accidents, people who were affected or lost some brain function are now either completely different or have lost a certain ability. They now have lost their thinking capacity or memory, or even personality they themselves have to some extent ceased to be themselves and this is dependent on the brain functioning without the brain there is no reason to assume they keep on living or even to the extremity they continue to live and have retained their previous personality. I can then conclude mind-body dualism is not only irrational but completely combative to our knowledge in science. I would like to remind you those are just small and probably flawed versions of arguments which deserve pages upon pages to unravel and explain them. Just to quickly deal with my opponents argument his point 5 'If jesus is not real that would mean that heaven is not real, so how are these people going to heaven and coming back? ' many people have had 'real' encounters with 'real' aliens, the Bigfoot ,Loch Ness monster and ghosts. These claims are unscientific and the claim that they experienced heaven is to me just as wild and unjustified as the ones I mentioned above. We experience dreams, we can induce a hallucination or have a very real emotional or physical encounter through meditation or even by listening to music or looking at artwork. Now some can be explained and some cannot. To argue that I need to give you a plausible account for those experiences in order to override an unjustified conclusion is an argument from ignorance. Point 6 also relates to point 5.