I would say that anyone who proposes that the decay of a particular atom is "really" caused, even though we've never detected any evidence that that is so, is just making up causes because they refuse to believe that something could happen without a cause. Again, circular reasoning. Your only rebuttal to an example of an uncaused effect is to assert what you're trying to defend in the first place - that all effects have causes.
No, you havent. Not even close. First, you have provided no support for your first cause beyond repeating it ad nauseum.
There is no proof for your "X" existing and certainly none that it has existed eternally.
You have shown nothing but the typical arrogance and ignorance of the creationist. Repitition is not support and it ain't so be cause you say it is.
Oh, there are several problems with the argument I used to start this thread. I knew that when I posted it. I was trying to spark debate. Several people have found the problems and commented on them. You, unfortunately, have not.
Whether my logic is bad or not has nothing to do with how one should be treated as a person. One should not be labelled. You should address my argument, not be labelling me or issuing adjectives in my direction such as "arrogant" and "ignorant."
All I said was that the Big Bang means that the universe came into being. It once did not exist and now it exists.
But before continuing, I will stop right there and see if anyone disagrees with me.
I disagree because I think you are using the term "univerese" to mean all things in exsistance.
There is good reason to believe that there is more to the universe than what is in our hubble volume. The idea that time itself started with the big bang is, perhaps, outdated though it was persuasivly argued by hawking in "A breif history of time".
1: Our "universe" (meaning our space time continum) is larger than our hubble volume. Microwave backround radiation suggests this. Hence there are galaxys beyond our hubble volume. Just becase galaxys they are retreating at faster than the speed of light (and are therfore invisible and unreachable) is no reason to believe that they don't exsist.
2: Our "universe" (meaning our space time continum). Could have been produced from a prior universe in a larger "multiverse" (see thread on inflationary cosmology) or it could have been produced from a nehboring "brane" colliding with our brane.
So the universe (this time meaning "all exsistance") was not caused by the big bang (in my opinion). Instead the big bang was just something that happened in a larger multiverse, and as such had a cause (or was causeless as some quantum mechanical things are truly causeless (again in my opinion)).
Even if the things I have stated are not true, they are still not logicaly inconsistant hence it is not inenvitable that we beleve in a causeless god.