Does God Exist

In this debate I will be trying to disprove the existence of God while my opponent, KRFournier, will try to prove the existence of God. In the first round I will be presenting three points that disprove the existence of God.DefinitionsGOD: the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe.(1)For the sake of argument, I will add three characteristics to the def. of God1.) He is omnipotent. He has the ability to do whatever he wills and has unlimited power. 2.)He is omnipresent. If he is omnipotent, then if follows that he is omnipresent as well since he has the ability to do whatever he wants.3.)He is omniscient. Creating everything would require knowing it first; Therefore, God knows everythingArguments against the existence of GodI) THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO PROVE HIS EXISTENCEIf you have no evidence to prove something true, then by default it is false. For example, I say I believe in a pink unicorn. If I have no evidence to prove my belief in pink unicorns, then unicorns are not real. But if I do have evidence that pink unicorns are real, then they are real until somebody proves my evidence to be false; now replace pink unicorns with God. I cannot further this argument because it does not require me to present evidence but rather my opponent. I will most happily try to disprove any evidence he has to bring forth though. II)The paradox of the stoneThis is actually a pretty popular argument that ask the question "Can God create a stone that is so heavy he can't lift it?" If he cannot create the stone, then there is something that he can't do and therefore he is not omnipotent. If he can create the stone, then there is still something he can't do and he is not omnipotent. Either way God is not omnipotent; Moreover, a being that is not omnipotent is not God. This argument can be generalized to the paradox of omnipotence which states that if a being can perform any action, then it should be able to create a task which this being is unable to perform; hence, this being cannot perform all actions. Yet, on the other hand, if this being cannot create a task that it is unable to perform, then there exists something it cannot do.(2)III)God cannot be omniscientThe argument can be presented in the following syllogismP1.)God is omniscient(From def. above)P2.)God is and always has been omniscient(P1)P3.)A being's omniscience entails, among other things, that it has all experiential knowledge. (neccessary truth)P4.)Having all experiential knowledge entails knowing what it is like to learn.(neccessary truth)P5.)God knows and always has known what it is like to learn.(P2-P4)P6.) Knowing what it is like to learn entails having learned something.(neccessary truth)P7.)Having learned something entails that one has gone from a state of not-knowing to a state of knowing. (neccessary truth)P8.)God has gone from a state of not-knowing to a state of knowing.(P5-P7)P9.)There was a time when God was in a state of not-knowing. (P8)P10.) God has not always been omniscient. (from P9) P11.) God has always been omniscient and has not always been omniscient. (from P2 & P10) (C) Therefore, God does not exist. (from P1-P11)(3)The argument simply says that if God is omniscient, then he knows what it is like to learn. However, if he knows what it is like to learn then that means he must have learned something, which entails that he moved from a state of not-knowing to a state of knowing and therefore cannot be omniscient and God cannot exist.Thanks for reading! This is my first debate and I have to say that I had a lot of fun with it. Thanks also to KRFournier for accepting the challenge and I wish him luck.(1) http://dictionary.reference.com...(2) http://en.wikipedia.org...(3) http://www.infidels.org...