A question to all atheists!

[Amarok]

All he’s doing is avoiding the crux of the hypothetical by arguing over semantics, which is why I switched over to possible world semantics and his response to that was “haha”.
 
I’ll repeat what I wrote earlier. Imagine a possible world where no natural world (including time if you assume time is intertwined with the natural world) existed. In this possible world could a natural world be produced? My answer is no. If your answer is yes, then please explain to me how a timeless state of affairs with zero potentiality would produce a natural world.
 
Now, we live in a possible world (the actual world) where there is a natural world and time. Therefore, we can conclude that the natural world and time always existed.
 
If you can’t follow this logic then you’re either dumb or don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about, physicist or not.
 
By the way, this is what I’ve been saying from the beginning, but I had to rephrase it in this way because Alex kept going back to semantics because he’s not intelligent enough to rebut the heart of what is being discussed here.

It is you who has demonstrated the complete inability to  address anything that's said in a meaningful way or make any attempt to reflect about your own argument and assumptions. You're merely repeating the same line over and over with more insults mixed in. That could be construed aa lack of sufficient intelligence, but I rather suspect that your intellectual inflexibility stems from the fact that you are trying to follow a fixed script to a "gotcha"-moment against atheists.

Well of course he has to follow his apologist script Alex how else would he answer