Kalam Sucks Butt

Pro's getten beat on I. The chief concernWow, Pro realy didn't answer me. He needs to read up on atemporal causation. If a ball rests on a sheet the ball caused a curve in the sheet even if the ball has been there forever! Its still casue. God is above laws and therefore can exist before the universe. If nothing existed before e universe, than whatever would havet to be in a vindictive vaccum to cause the universe. A vindictive vaccum would of destroyed the universe before being into existence [1].Also geocentericm is trueOtherguy getting pwned II. The fallacy of equiovcationIt doesn't matter if it comes out of flesh or out of nothing! It;s still a cause!! You then ignored me! Everything in the universe has a relational attribute of the conservation. Due to conservation and post reaction everything must be caused. Post reaction is talking about a beginning in a pre cause sense. We see a post reaction com intro in the early universe. Meaning there must be a pre cause or pre causal relations in order to simulate the universe's existence. There was a state of affairs where the universe had a causeal law, therefore there must be a cause because the second the universe is in existence a causal effect is in existence. The cause must be God already provenYou ignoore this! Time can still have caus! WHy cant it?Vote con in III. Problems with the first premiseSubatomic Particles do not exist! Pros argument here is just "I dont believe you therefore your wrong!" He say physics say im wrong therefore I am. Hes appealing to majority.Scientists believe in fairies; they call them electrons. That"s just a language game, and we all know what Wittgenstein uncontroversially proved about language games. Supposedly there are these magical little floating things and here are their essential properties: 1) We can"t see them 2) They hold everything together That sounds to me a lot like fairies. And you might say, "Well, there are different types. Protons, electrons, etc. etc. quarks whatever." So the fairy creatures come in different races, so what? Now I"m not one to doubt the existence of fairies. Frankly I see no evidence of their non-existence and you can"t prove a negative. But let"s stop teaching that there is anything scientific about them. No one has ever even seen one, and noted anthropologist Sam Harris has explained that this is the key feature of myth. The subatomic world (actually Latin for "below the earth" " and where do fairies live exactly? yep.) is false as traditionally explained. And the diagrams shown to children are simply outrageous.He doesn't refute the cause of decay! The Copenhagen interpretation has big flaws, but scienstist accept it becuase they don't want to believe in God! Copenhagen says the local quantu is equal to the distence of mass times C. This entails that the local quantu isn't subjected to the mass width of basic geometry! John Bell assumed that quantum physics was a under a bypoled movement system. No evidence of that has ever been givenIV. Problems with the second premisePro fails to answer me here also V isn't relevant and VI is a new argument and is dirty trickJust look around ul see inteligence! Only personal things can give choices there's nothing else that can do it! Pro fails vote me[1] Douglas, Carl 2003 Vindictive vaccums and the early universe