The Principle of Contingent Causation: The Impossibility of Infinite Regress.

[GrandizerII]

Non Sequitur. If we have to argue for the Big Bang, or say for the Beginning of the Universe, then it never happened? Doesn't follow.

Angrboda, your video presenter first of all begs the question when says, "what if you have an infinite amount of time". That an infinite amount of seconds is possible what needs to be demonstrated. Therefore, her reasoning is circular and assumes what she needs to prove. It's like this:

Proof that an infinite number formed by successive addition is (allegedly) possible:

1. Assume that you have an infinite number of seconds formed by successive addition.
2. Therefore you allegedly can get to an infinite number with an infinite number of seconds.

It's hopelessly, irremediably fallacious, and cannot get off the ground. You need to prove that an actually infinite number of things can be formed by successive addition without assuming an actually infinite number of seconds formed by successive addition of one second to another already exists.

And in 17:20 onward, the next person in the video says, indeed, you will never reach the point, where you can say, finished, I've done it, I've reached infinite. That concedes the point. That Atheism needs such fallacious claims as actual infinites formed by successive addition is enough to reject it.

Haven't seen the video yet, but going on what you're saying.

The argument from successive addition isn't an argument against the possibility of an actual infinite; it's an argument against the completion of an actual infinite and is ok with the possibility of an actual infinite. So it's not begging the question (in this context) if one starts with the premise that an actual infinite is possible.

Indeed, if you already have an infinite sequence of past moments, then it is possible to "complete" such a sequence by successive addition until you get to the present moment. This is trivially true.