God does not exist.

Given the opportunity, I shall now expand upon my previous statements, as well as making new ones.Expanding upon My Regard for My Opponent's First ContentionWhile it is admirable to try to assign a logic clause to the explanation of why God must be the Creator of the universe, your logic is in itself, as I have stated, critically flawed, in that it is based on unfounded assumptions, and then makes further assumptions that are rooted in these unfounded assumptions. Now, it is, actually, likely to be true that outside of our universe, in the void, there is not time, because time is theoretically carried by bosons, specifically chronotons, just as gravity is carried by gravitons. This, of course, has yet to be verified, and remains a theory (of course, gravity is technically theoretical as well).Now, regarding the conclusion of your syllogism, that "God is the only explanation that fits this description," I would ask 'which God?' There are hundreds of extant religions, to say nothing of extinct ones. Among the hundreds of extant religions, even, there are thousands of denominations, some of which differ drastically in doctrine, despite belonging to the same religion. So which 'God' is real? Most of them do have a God figure, of some kind. I find it highly unlikely that they all happen to be real. This begs the question that, if they are not all real, which one(s) is(are) real? Since Judeo-Christian religions, mainly Christianity, Islam, and Judaism (incidentally, in that order of popularity), are the most populous religious group, perhaps we should elect that they're true? But they're only so widespread because of powerful historical theocracies. Were we to ask the same question a number of years ago, during the rule of the Roman Empire (and before Rome invented the Catholic church), Jupiter would be the most commonly acclaimed God. Going further back to the time of the Greek prowess, would Zeus be the true God? Or was it Allah/Yahweh all along, and the Greeks and Romans (before the Dark Ages, ironically inspired by Christianity), the two most advanced civilizations in history, until a few hundred years ago, were just mistaken? But their religion was just as original as the ones originating in the Middle East. So perhaps they were indeed 'heathen,' as the Bible describes. Well, if Middle Eastern religions are to be regarded as superior, what about Egyptian religion? Why would Ra not be the supreme God? He is, in fact, remarkably like the Hebrew God, except he isn't celibate. He even had an inferior, who is still a 'God,' Horus, who is, mythologically speaking, almost identical to Jesus, except that when he was transfigured on a mount, he gained the head of a falcon. So, I reiterate, which God was the first cause of the universe?Expanding upon My Regard for My Opponent's Second ContentionI reiterate that 'prophecy' is not indicative of the supernatural. Modern science can predict that in approximately 5 billion years, Andromeda and the Milky Way will collide, likely destroying most of the objects within both, and forming a massive collection of nebulae, to start over. Does that mean that modern science is an indication of the supernatural, because it can predict the future? Now, I am not calling Biblical prophecy as reliable as modern science, by any means. I am merely indicating that anyone can predict that something will happen in an ancient book, and, if you wait long enough, it will likely happen, because history works in cycles. Very seldom is something totally original to occur in history. If you trace history through these cycles, you will find that knowledge of them allows further prediction (this is partly how economics and sociopolitical experts are able to predict what a president's economic plan or foreign policy will do for the nation). Does this mean that economics and sociopolitical experts are magical, or prophets, because they can predict the future, in varying degrees of accuracy? I answer 'no.' Prediction is an inexact practice, and may not necessarily come true. For example, the Biblical prediction that the 'mark of the beast' will be born upon the condemned, and Jesus will appear in the sky, riding a white horse, and that the chosen will spontaneously vanish, leaving behind the damned, and that then, all of God's people will meet in a shining reincarnation of Jerusalem made of gemstones, a perfect cube, of 15,000 cubic miles, to watch Satan and his followers be flung into a large lake of fire. Personally, I find this oddly reminiscent of the words of someone on acid, not the words of someone intelligently predicting the future. Now, I would be fascinated if my opponent could justify these Biblical prophecies in a rational manner.Sources:King James BibleThe Grand Design, by Stephen Hawking, Leonard MlodinovWikipedia: Bosons