The Kalam Cosmological Argument is sound

. All I (PRO) have to do is logically defend the logic and premises of the Cosmological Argument beyond a reasonable doubt. I (PRO) hold the Burden of Proof for the Conclusion. The Con must logically defeat the logic or one of the premises of the Cosmological Argument to a reasonable doubt. Burden of proof is on the Con ONLY if he/she chooses to bring up new claims. Definitions- Logic -(from the Greek λογική logikē) refers to both the study of modes of reasoning (which are valid and which are fallacious) and the use of valid reasoning. Universe- the totality of everything that is observable. This includes all matter and energy [9] For this round we are going to use it in the traditional sense, the OBSERVABLE Universe. THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT 1. Everything that had a beginning had a cause. 2. The Universe had a beginning. 3. Therefore the Universe had a cause. [6] P1 The Law of Causality, the fundamental principle of science. Francis Bacon (The father of science) put it- "True knowledge is knowledge by causes. " Science is inherency the search for causes and without it the laws of logic do not apply. Even the great skeptic David Hume could not deny the Law of Causality saying, "I never asserted so absurd a proposition as that something could arise without a cause. " [3][5] To deny the Law of Causality is to deny is to deny rationality, however my opponent has started a logical debate thus concedes fundamentally causality. I have rebuttals for time assumption arguments, but that will be next round. P2 The Big Bang theory itself does not state how, why, or even what condition the Universe was in before the miniscule non-singularity. It does not offer an explanation as to a beginning but other fields do. The following are readily accessible for anyone to look up, but the references I have provided contain these as well: 1. The Second Law of Thermodynamics- If the Universe has eternally existed, than then time would have thinned the Universe to highest possible entropy state allowing nothing to form or even justifiably exist because any finite matter infinitely uniform (because of time) over an infinite space would result in a theoretically absolute zero state with no density whatsoever. 2. The Universe is Expanding- Because the Universe is currently accelerating away from itself; we can reasonably assume that the Universe was smaller and closer together in the past. It could have started from a singularity. 3. Radiation from the Big Bang- The Cosmic Background Radiation was accidentally found in 1965. This light glow is actually radiation and heat from the initial explosion. [8] 4. Great Galaxy Seeds- Scientists believed that if the Big Bang actually occurred, scientists believed that we should se slight variations (or ripples) in the temperature of the cosmic background radiation. These temperature ripples enabled matter to congregate by gravitational attraction into galaxies. In 1989 the search for these ripples was intensified by NASA with the satellite called "COBE". George Smoot announced COBE's findings in 1992 in newspapers saying, "If you're religious, it's like looking at God. " University of Chicago astrophysicist Michael Turner stated, "The significance of this [discovery] cannot be overstated. They have found the Holy Grail of Cosmology. " The ripples show that the explosion and expansion of the universe was precisely tweaked to cause just enough matter to congregate to allow galaxy formation, but not enough to cause the universe to collapse back on itself. Smoot called them the "machining marks from the creation of the universe" and the "fingerprints of the maker. " [2] [5] 5. Einstein's' Theory of General Relativity- The theory absolutely demands an absolute beginning for time, space, and matter. It shows that time, space, and matters are co-relative. That is, they are interdependent- you can't have one without the others. 6. [5] The Kalam (from the Arabic word for "eternal") Cosmological Argument in Philosophy: a. An infinite number of days has no end b. But today is the end day of history (history being a collection of all days). c. Therefore, there were not an infinite number of days before today (Time did not have a beginning) If you try to assert that there is no beginning, then the distinction between any points in time becomes indistinguishable and thus any two points in time with accuracy (general relativity). [5] This philosophical argument is a pre-requisite to any arguments against the 2nd premise. CONCLUSION AND ANALYSIS: 1. Everything that had a beginning had a cause. 2. The Universe certainly had a beginning. 3. Therefore the Universe certainly has a cause. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ JUST FOR FUN (Is not a pre-requisite to winning the debate but you can refute if you like): IF THERE IS NO GOD, WHY IS THERE SOMETHING RATHER THAN NOTHING? Characteristics of the First Cause just from the evidence we've discussed. The First Cause must be: •Self-existent, timeless, nonspatial, and immaterial (since the First Cause created time, space, and matter, the First Cause must be outside of time, space, and matter). In other words, he is without limits, or infinite from a material perspective; •Unimaginably powerful, to create the entire universe out of nothing; •Supremely intelligent, to design the universe with such incredible precision (we can't talk more about the complexity of life, non-life, and the Universe itself. •Personal, in order to choose to convert a state of nothingness into the time-space-material universe (an impersonal force has no ability to make choices) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WHO MADE THE CREATOR (OR CAUSER) ? ? The statement begs the question that everything had a beginning. It would be a paradox Universe for everything to have a beginning because the very first piece of existence would need a cause as well. The only logical conclusion one can make is that at least one thing in the "Universe" is eternal and therefore did not need a causation. We know for sure that our Universe had a beginning, despite the fact that many think-tanks like Einstein tried to add a fudge factor to his equations. Eventually evidence caught up and the Big Bang axiom is the result. References: 1)Craig, William Lane (2000). The Kalam Cosmological Argument. Eugene: Wipf & Stock Publishers. ISBN 1-57910-438-X. 2)Craig, William Lane (1996). "Initial Arguments: A Defense of the Cosmological Argument for the Existence of God". The Craig-Smith Debate: Does God Exist? . Leadership University. Retrieved 28 November 2009. 3)Craig, William Lane (2007). "Causal Premiss [sic] of the Kalam Argument". Reasonable Faith with William Lane Craig: Q&A. Reasonable Faith. Retrieved 27 November 2009. 4)Heeren, Show Me God, 168 5)Norman L. Geisler, F. T. I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist 6). http://en.wikipedia.org... 7). http://en.wikipedia.org... 8). http://en.wikipedia.org... 9). http://en.wikipedia.org...