When do we cross the line from 'animal' to 'person?'

[Esquilax]

The part where you leap from "time has a beginning" to "therefore it must have a creator, and it must be MY pet creator god!" despite not knowing a damn thing about the circumstances of a pre-time universe,

I got that you accepted that time had a start
the need for a creator is very obvious, as the state before time must be static and after time is dynamic
Static is the opposite of dynamic
A doer must involve to change it

Shall we play "spot the presupposition?" How do you know time was static before the big bang? Can you do what real scientists cannot, and give a measurable reading of the singularity? If no, then you have no way of proving your assertion, and therefore your entire construct collapses before it's even gotten off the ground.

BONUS PRESUPPOSITION: This "doer," even if I am to accept your initial flawed premise, need not be the muslim god. It could be Cthulhu, and I'd have an equal amount of proof for that as for anything else. Cthulhu F'tagn!

If you are going to reject that, then you need to prove that logic may not apply
i.e. a logical paradox may exist.
Until you do that, you have no argument.

You would need to apply some logic before you have an argument. As it stands, you've got baseless crap.

There is no science involved in the proof, it is by logic which is much stronger than science.

Cool, thanks: I needed a new post for the hall of shame.