Small post Clarifying a common fallacy here.

[leo-rcc]

Deeper blue won Kasparov in Chess didn't it?

Now you are comparing a machine designed specifically to do one task well and nothing else to a human that is much more allround and therefore needs to balance out in what fields of expertise it must excell. That is hardly a fair comparison. Kasparov is way more complex than Deeper Blue. You might as well argue a cheetah is more complex because it can run faster than humans. It is not a good comparison.

And I still stand with the possible scenario that the creator CAN be less complex.

Supply the evidence for that and I will consider it. Not the evidence for a creator, but that a creator can be less complex that created a universe and everything in it.

But I wont argue further, because I think God should have been more complex too. I mentioned it, because someone in the forum had repeatedly stated as though a fact that the creator MUST be at least as complex.

So far I have seen nothing that seems to suggest otherwise.

I am willing to debate though, that the poping out of god from nothing is MORE improbable than the poping out of the Universe from nothing.

Who claimed the universe "popped" out from nothing?