The existence of God is plausible

Isn't it ironic that the people who are most obsessed with god tend to be atheists trying to disprove god Thank you for the speedy response. I would like to point out that I stated in the beginning of this debate that the burden of proof is to be shared. I would also like to point out that my opponent has not provided any evidence against the existence of god. This surprised me, because now I have nothing to refute. So instead, I will defend my original points. My opponent pointed out that my points can be attributed to scientific ignorance. I would like to refute that here: In my previous argument I provided three examples of evidence for god, (Free will, consciousness, and the Anthropic Principle). These three phenomenons cannot be explained by science, however they CAN be explained by god. Does this prove the existence of god? Of course not! I was simply providing evidence. Just because we don't understand something doesn't mean that the supernatural is the only other explanation. The fact remains that a supernatural cause, currently, is simply the best explanation for these events. My opponent has also pointed out that some animals seem to have free will and demonstrate consciousness. I agree, many animals seem to demonstrate self awareness. What's your point? I never stated that humans are the only creatures to be self aware. In regard to my original three points: 1 The Anthropic principle Some scientists speculate that there are in infinite number of universes, each with there own physics. If this where the case, only a handful of them would be able to sustain life. I admit this is a weak point, I simply wanted to show that the simple fact that we are alive to witness it, is absolutely incredible. If there was a God, surely a universe where conscious life could live in would be a must. 2 Free will First of all, I would like to point out that being able to evaluate a situation is not the same as free will. Con points out that an omnipotent (all knowing) god would already know all future events. This is not necessarily true though. The definition of omnipotent is all knowing. What if the future isn't predetermined? What if the choices we make, thanks to free will, dictate the future? If this where the case, then the future could not be predicted because it doesn't exist yet. This is getting a little philosophical, bear with me. If the future doesn't exist, and OUR CHOICES ARE NOT PREDETERMINED, then even an omnipotent god wouldn't know the future, because there would be nothing to know. Consciousness: Can a machine be self aware? This is a debate topic in itself. I argue no, it cannot. One day machines might be able to imitate consciousness, but sentience is much more than that. Sentient beings have emotions, they can visualize things, they can imagine things. It is my belief that no machine will ever be capable of imagination or empathy. A computer can only evaluate. Similarly, if we evolved from nothing but chemical reactions, then why would those chemicals ever experience feelings? Why should they become self aware? This doesn't even make sense from an evolutionary perspective. There is no good scientific explanation for why or how consciousness exists. There is however, a logical explanation. If the universe was guided by a conscious energy, it would make sense that sentient creatures could exist. In conclusion: -Computers will never have imaginations, therefore Biological machines shouldn't have consciousness. -An all knowing god does not necessarily know the future, -Logical Atheists should not believe in free will -I cannot prove the existence of god, i can only supply evidence. However the burden of proof is on both of us.