God Does Exist, ( Christian God )

First I will correct an error of mine in round 2. *CORRECTION* The weak force is not how I described it, I was describing the strong force. The analogy to gravity for particles was describing the strong force...my bad. The weak force has to do with the force between leptons and hadrons...my bad again, I confused the terms. Ok, to respond to Pro: Pro's logical demonstration for god is that if the subatomic weak force were different just 1 part of 10^100 of an atom then life could not have arisen, therefore, since it appears we have beaten these extremely low odds, it's more likely that the universe was finely tuned by an intelligence. In short, Pro is saying: The odds are so low for a life permitting universe that there must be an intelligence increasing those odds by finely tuning the universe, or else it's too unlikely for life to exist randomly. I argue that the universe is obviously adequate for some life, as we are here, but not finely tuned for life. Earth is currently the only observable planet to have life, and the Earth itself is not exactly finely tuned for life either given that "99.9% of all species that have ever lived on Earth are now extinct." http://paleobiology.si.edu... A 99.9% extinction rate does not point to something fine tuned for life. To further illustrate the non sequitur from low odds--> purposive god Let me make an analogy. If all polygons had just .00000000000000001 degree more or less than 180 degrees, then triangles couldn't exist. Mathematicians have figured out that with just this slight change in degree, triangles would not be possible. The odds of any other polygon existing with inexact amounts of 180 degrees are far higher than triangles existing, making triangles' existence very improbable. Because triangles require such a low probability, and they do exist, an intelligence allowed for triangles to be polygons. The point is, that inferring an intelligence because the naturally occurring odds are low is a non sequitur. So what if the odds are low? Outliers are part of randomness. Outliers do not equal a purposive intelligence, and Pro has not demonstrated such by saying "the big bang has no reason to create such odds...you would have to be able to look at [those odds] and be amazed." The odds for life aren't zero, so it's not impossible. Pro also continues "I have clearly stated that you still haven't told me how these odds are possible if life is, I would say "Random,"... No one has shown me that's its possible for a quantum vacuum to create universes or a universe with these incredible odds. Therefore the best explanation left for me to conclude is that God did this." Ok, this is a science claim, and I must redeem myself from my previous error. Physics tells us that something is matter/energy/radiation/atoms/particles/wavelengths. Without any of these characteristics, we are left with nothing. This is a state of nothingness. When you arrive at a state of nothingness, there is a faint physical field of subatomic particles existing and not existing at fractions of time. http://science.jrank.org... This state is unstable and can't stay nothing for long, because so many subatomic particles popping in and out of existence will lead to energy being expressed from these fluctuations. All positive energy (matter and energy, you and me, planets and stars) is cancelled out by negative energy in the form of gravity. http://www.astrosociety.org... So at the big bang in quantum fluctuations, positive energy (+matter) and negative energy (-gravity) could be a set: [+0,-0] no energy or gravity. At the big bang, energy was expressed from the fluctuations, and so was gravity. So it might have looked like: [+1,-1] [+2,-2] The universe expands [+100,-100] [+100000,-100000] All random, all expressed. Stars form, and so do planets...maybe some (one we know of) are habitable for life.