God exist - and he speaks to each and everyone of us through experiences and coincidences

My opponent, Lordgrae, stated this in ROUND 3:"I shall attempt to use a basic argument technique [to discredit your arguments in this ROUND]:God is bound by natural law.You claim that god messages people through earthquakes and storms. This shall be the premise.God disrupts normal weather and tectonics to send messages to peopleIf god disrupts natural laws then he is unnatural.When he disrupts weather patterns and floods the earth, that is unnatural."My opponent states this to discredit my claim that God is natural, and therefore to assert that God is not restrained by fundamental natural limitations.Of course he is wrong about this - and humans serve as a wonderful example. In fact, uncertainty and unpredictability (which is observed in weather phenomena) is quite natural, and is even observed at the most tiniest scales in the universe! In Quantum physics, sub-atomic particle's do not always trace out predictable paths and frequently exhibit uncertainty in their behavior [1]. This causality-defying behavior of particles has been attributed to their wave-like nature. Instead, scientists speak of particles in terms of "probability"; the chances that a particle will be found at a given location in the atom is determined by the square of its relevant psi function [2].Humans, of course, are made of particles. Now there are a number of rules that apply to particles. And there are basic rules that apply to large systems of matter (which is made up of particles). It is a widely-held belief that the rules of physics and chemistry establish the apparent laws and rules observed in more complex sciences, like molecular biology, cellular biology, and physiology. This is called (scientific) reductionism [3], and it was a popular belief more than a century ago. But it is no longer all that clear that it is valid, and there is some indication that it might not be [4]. To compensate for this difficulty, many scientists now speak of something called "emergence" - where greater complexity of systems give rise to new laws, new concepts, and new generalizations [5]. The old reductionist principle doesn't always appear to work. In fact, there are some scientific disciplines (such as cybernetics and systems theory) that espouse a non-reductionist view of the universe [6]. The general concept is that complexity yields entirely new phenomena with new rules. Complexity yields something new.Humans exhibit something like this, with respect to consciousness. Now virtually all scientists will agree that humans are incapable of violating certain natural laws. The laws and rules of chemistry still govern our molecular interactions, because we require the intake of chemical energy (through food) for internal metabolic processes to take place [7]. And the rules of electricity and magnetism still apply to humans because physiological processes are dependent on those phenomena to take place. Likewise the fundamental property of mass definitely exhibits influence on humans, as does the force of gravity.But consciousness is a funny thing, because with it humans can cognitively interact with the larger world. Through consciousness, humans can engage with the world and alter it - constructing such architectural wonders as olympic stadiums and skyscrapers; technological marvels can also be constructed, such as airplanes and power plants. Humans therefore have the capacity to transform the world around even though they are restrained by natural rules and laws. A human can't teleport miraculoulsy through space, but he can pick up a broken dish, ride a bicycle across town, or build a space shuttle that will rocket him to the moon. God is in the same exact boat.God - the universe - cannot construct a human being from dust instantaneously on a barren planet. But he can create a human life form after 3 billion years of arduous evolution and trial and error. God like man, requires time, to construct things. He is also restrained by physical limitations. As we know, humans are composed of matter interacing with forces (electricity, magnetism, gravity, etc.). It has been proposed by philosophers, that consciousness is a rudimentary, all-pervading quality of the universe. This is called panpsychism [8]. The famous English mathematician and philosopher Alfred North Whitehead has argued that the indeterminancy (unpredictability) observed in Quantum physics is best explained as an effect by a rudimentary consciousness that exist in nature; he has proposed that consciousness is a natural feature that arises in the mechanical interactions between two or more particles [9]. This would suggest that virtually all interactions in space and time yield conscious experiences, including those within the atom. This is similar to what I believe. I call my model (which I'm working on with old university friends) Hylopathic Mechanics, but I'll spare you the details.If consciousness is a rudimentary, all-pervading natural feature of the universe, then God (assuming he would be intelligent) would certainly have the capacity to call up hurricanes and tornadoes at will and direct them where he believes it appropriate. A conscious, intelligent universe invites that possibility.Humans, or any other intelligent life forms in the universe, would now be considerably less smart than the most intelligent - God.And there is some indication that God is substantially smarter than any of us!(At this point I'll introduce an old post:)As expressed by world-renown physicists Paul Davies and Stephen Hawking, almost all scientists now agree that our universe occupies a very narrow place, by having just the right conditions for life, where matter can congregate to form stars and planets, where the liquid medium of water is possible, and where molecular chemistry exist because the proton and electron are unique stable particles.Over the last 3 decades, evidence has demonstrated that our universe is just right for life - that it's been fine-tuned.As Dr. Stephen Hawking has mentioned:"The laws of science, as we know them . . . contain many fundamental numbers, like the size of the by Text-Enhance" href="../../Gods-actions-can-be-unappealing-but-mans-actions-are-far-more-dangerous-to-life-on-planet-Earth/1/">electric charge of the electron and the ratio of the masses of the proton and the electron . . . . The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life [10]."According to Hawking, our universe is just right for life. If the fundamental constants of this universe were slightly different, life would not be possible. This is now the growing view in the scientific community. Prominent physicist Paul Davies, who was once a critic of the fine-tuning arguments decades ago, now acknowledges that they are genuine. He has this to say: "There is now broad agreement among physicists and cosmologists that the Universe is in several respects fine-tuned for life [11]."He also says this: "Calculations by Brandon Carter show that if gravity had been stronger or weaker by 1 part in 10^40, then . . . stars like the sun could not exist. This would . . . make life impossible [12]."And then there is this: "If the initial explosion of the big bang had differed in strength by as little as 1 part in 10^60, the universe would have either quickly collapsed back on itself, or expanded too rapidly for stars to form. In either case, life would be impossible [13]."My opponent, Lordgrae, also stated this in the last ROUND:"So what does god have against Africa?"Right now, many African economies are growing and doing better than economies elsewhere (have you heard Europe's troubles?). Yes, Africa needs more economic growth.But in the past calamity and disaster have happened everywhere. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org...[2] https://en.wikipedia.org...[3] [4] [5] [6] https://en.wikipedia.org...[7] https://en.wikipedia.org...[8] [9] https://en.wikipedia.org...[10] https://en.wikipedia.org...[11] [12] [13] http://www.discovery.org...