is the belief in a God/Creator more logical than the belief of scientific theory

I see my opponent is new to DDO, and I'd like to be the first to welcome them! Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle: Something from Nothing http://www.thenational.ae... While the Big Bang Theory makes no claims that we came from nothing, there are certain theories that suggest this is possible - the Uncertainty Principle being chief among them. Heisenberg's principle offers a startling possibility, that something CAN possibly come from nothing, and this concept led Hendrik Casimir to discover what would be termed the "Casimir Effect". http://physics.aps.org... To summarize, this experiment led to the understanding that even in a perfect vacuum energy still exists and can have an observable effect on physical matter. This leads us to "virtual particles". These incredibly fascinating little guys seem to violate our current understanding of physics and allow room for a "something from nothing" argument. The Big Bang: Origin of our Known Universe http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov... I'd like to start by saying that the Big Bang Theory DOES NOT claim our universe came into existence from nothing. This is an assumption oft made by those who lack an understanding of the theory. The Big Bang Theory only suggests how our present state came to be. It speaks nothing of where the initial matter may have come from, or what was before. While the state of the universe in the earliest instants of the Big Bang expansion is poorly understood and still an area of open investigation, there are many supporting observations that coincide with this theory: Cosmic Background Radiation: CMB http://aether.lbl.gov... CMB is thermal radiation, the characteristics of which match the theory that everything was in a singular, hot, dense state and expanded outward in every direction, and began cooling over time. Hubble's Constant http://www.supernova.lbl.gov... Hubble's law is considered the first observational basis for the expanding space paradigm, and is one of the strongest cases for the Big Bang Theory. Large Scale Structure and Red Shift http://books.google.com... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... Measurements of celestial bodies around us to help determine direction, distance, speed, and size. These offer supporting evidence, and make the Big Bang much more reasonable than a belief without. Belief There seems to be confusion between believing something based on reason versus believing something based on faith. These two are drastically different: Having reasonable evidence to support your belief grants you knowledge. Having a willingness to believe in your belief grants you faith. This is not an attack on religion, or the god of my opponent or anyone reading. This is the different groundwork between a scientific theory and belief in a faith-based system. Divinity vs. Data Referring back to the title "is the belief in a God/Creator more logical than the belief of scientific theory" A belief in any creator is not logical, as this belief depends on logical fallacies and rests on an absence of evidence. A belief in a scientific theory is logical because it depends on observable laws of the universe and rests on ever-growing evidence. It would be highly illogical to choose a belief based on no observable evidence that rests on a foundation of absence. Conclusion Virtual particles open the possibility of a "something from nothing" argument. The Big Bang Theory is supported with substantial amounts of data, making it a highly reasonable belief. No evidence supports the belief of a divine creator of any sort, thus making this belief highly illogical and unreasonable. PRO's resolution remains negated.