Disproving Odin - An Experiment in arguing with a theist with Theist logic

[I_am_not_mafia]

Um, snowflakes don't begin to exist. They are a re-arrangement of existing matter. If the sense in which you're using 'begin to exist' includes snowflakes forming, then it includes our universe transforming from a previous state of existence.

Yes they very much do begin to exist.  It has to do with the word 'snowflake' and the necessary properties that form the underlying meaning of the word. If something does not match these properties, necessarily, it is not a snowflake. We have define the word 'snowflake' to have a couple of necessary properties to be considered a snowflake (frozen, crystallized water molecules in such and such a pattern...). The water molecules at some point don't have these properties, then they do. 

But it is quite arbitrary when they begin to exist. You could point to the instance when two water molecules join together in freezing temperatures but could we then classify that as a snowflake?

It also shows us that there is not a single cause you can point to for a snowflake beginning to exist.

Yet the KCA relies on the reader accepting that it is unequivocal when something begins to exist and that it will have a single cause. If not then you could use it to argue for polytheism.