Science provides excellent evidence for the existence of God

Good morning Thinker, thank you for your response. You said that my first argument is flawed because it is based on a hypothesis that has not been proven thoroughly. I would first like to say that in my statement on what I planned to debate I said I would provide evidence, not proof. Proof is an impossible requirement. I cannot for instance prove that I am not in a padded room drooling in a corner, and imagining that I am writing this response. There are certain basic ideas that we need to assume are true without proof if we are to examine our universe… For instance; other people exist, math and logic are reliable tools (science cannot prove this as science is based on these tools), the laws of physics are the same in all galaxies (what if for instance, a red shift means something different in another galaxy, so our measurements are all wrong?)… Without positing some improvable points, we cannot gain knowledge of any kind. You are correct that my first premise is based on theory, but both of my premises are based on theories that is accepted by almost all scientists working in the field. Read Stephen Hawking, Alex Vilenkin, Alan Guth, Roger Penrose, Martin Rees… Even Richard Dawkins admits to the beginning and apparent fine tuning of the Universe. In my last argument I ran out of room when trying to present evidence for the statement, "Things that begin to exist have a cause." You correctly state that a number of scientists see quantum fluctuations as an exception to this belief. There are major issues with citing quantum fluctuations as a cause however. First off, quantum fluctuations occur in a universe that is full of energy. Even the nothingness of "empty space" has light passing through, microwave & other types of energy passing through. If time, space, matter and energy all began at the Big Bang however (again, a point agreed upon by most scientists), the nothing that came prior to the Universe was fundamentally different. In the absence of time, space, matter and energy, can there be the probability that something will happen? Even top scientists smuggle something in prior to the Universe to avoid this problem. As Alex Vilenkin states (Many Worlds in One p 204) "The entire eternally inflating spacetime originated as a miniscule closed universe. It tunneled, quantum-mechanically, out of nothing and immediately plunged into the never-ending fury of inflation. Thus the universe is eternal, but did have a beginning." So spacetime existed in nothingness… But this means that it was not nothingness, and on page 176 in the same book Vilenkin said, "It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. With the proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past-eternal universe. There is no escape: they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning." If the Universe did begin to exist, it seems there are two choices; either it came to exist from absolute nothingness, or it was created. If it was created, are there things we can know about this creator? Let's see… 1) If a creator created time, space and matter, this creator is not composed of matter or limited by time and space. 2) It is intelligent. Why? Because a non-intelligent force cannot decide to do something at a specific point. A chair sitting in place from eternity would need something external to act upon it before it could move. A person sitting in this chair from eternity can decide to stand up if he chooses. If there is an infinite cause and a finite effect, the cause must decide to produce the effect. 3) If we accept that everything that begins to exist has a cause and this creator is the first cause, it must be eternal and uncaused. 4) This creator must be incredibly powerful, since it created the Universe(s) 5) This creator made the Universe with the expectation of life. The constants of the Universe (strength of gravity, the charge of protons/electrons, the strength of the strong nuclear force…) all need to be tuned to a very high degree of precision to allow for any form of life to exist, and this implies that the existence of life was intentional So using reason to point us at what a creator must look like if one exists, we get an intelligent, eternal, powerful creator of everything. Sound familiar? This of course instantly eliminates beliefs that think of God as an impersonal force or as something that came to exist within the Universe from pre-existing stuff. You objected to the point that "The odds of the Universe existing in a way that allows for life are so small as to be non-existent unless it was intentionally designed by an intelligent being." You state that "science proves that it is still posible for us to be here without gods help." Would you please provide an example of one or more of these proofs? I am not talking about tweaking the gravity in our solar system, but tweaking it more fundamentally at the earliest points. If gravity is so weak that stars cannot form for instance, we end up with a universe composed almost completely of hydrogen and helium. Can such a universe produce chemistry or life? What would happen if the charge of a proton was 1.1 and the electron had a charge of -.023? could atoms form? Anyhow, science is on my side in this again, and most scientists will say the same thing (see the ones named above or choose your own top-notch scientist)… The Universe appears fine-tuned for life. You next say that chance can account for fantastic odds, and this is true… to an extent. When odds reach a certain point however, it is no longer realistic to accept chance. For instance, Roger Penrose says that the chance of the entropy rate having the value it does is 1:10^123. What does this mean? It means that we can expect to have this value one time out of every 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 times (http://www.youtube.com... 6:53, but an interesting discussion beginning at 5:00). Other scientists give even smaller odds than Penrose. When looking at odds so small, chance can reasonably be discarded as a possibility. You say that, "if you think about the chances of life in the universe are relativly good. Out of the BILLIONS of stars…" Again, I am talking more fundamentally here, not about the odds once the Universe exists. I will tackle this one if space permits however. You gave a list of reasons that God is unlikely, (inaccurate scriptures, left no evidence, does not make himself known to everyone, the existence of evil…) but again, this is a less fundamental issue than I am discussing. If you are right and these issues cannot be explained, you may prove that a certain religion is wrong (A point that as a Christian I would be happy to debate in a more specialized debate), but it says nothing about whether a creator of the Universe is unlikely. You state that "Ordered complexity requires an explanation." Fair enough. A mind can think complex thoughts, but is not necessarily complex in itself. God being eternal mind has no body, no parts per say… The Universe (and life in particular) however display huge amounts of ordered complexity. I am running out of space however, so if you want to discuss abiogenesis and evolution, it will need to be in the next section. You provided three examples of complexity and listed a source, but it did not take me to the specifics of the argument, just to the home page. Would you please provide links to the articles you are referencing? Have a great day Thinker, I will talk to you later.