Refute a first cause which most people would call G-d AKA Deism

[xdrgnh]

Science can disprove not prove. We disproved a eternal universe via experiment. Therefore if the universe is not eternal it's existence must of started in a point in time or 13.7 billion years ago plus or minus.

So it is your contention that the Big Bang was creation ex nihilo, and not a transformation of (something, we know not what) that was already existent? And that we somehow have been able to rule out the latter?

Because if that's true, and you can demonstrate it, that would be news to a whole bunch of physicists that have been working on that particular problem.

Your Nobel prize awaits.

Before the big bang is not a scientific question and hence why no scientific theory has been proposed to explain it. Multi verse theory is not a scientific because it has no way of giving concrete experimental data. ex nihilo is a philosophical problem not a scientific problem because ex nihilio does not exist in science because the concept of nothing does not exist. Science can only deal with space time and matter. If none of those are present science cannot be applied.

---

What evidence? In mathematics you don't prove something using evidence. You prove it using logic and reason alone. That is what I've done here.

You seem to be answering a question I didn't ask.

But as you mentioned evidence. Put up or shut up. Logic and reason are insufficient on their own for real world application.

You can skew logic to prove black is white, (and then get killed at the next pelican crossing) and reason can be misused as well.

The ancient philosophers used these things alone and screwed up many things until science came along with EVIDENCE.

Well you were being ambiguous.

Skewed logic and reason is not logic and reason at all.

If you dispute the validity of per logic and reason then you must dispute the validity of pure mathematics because that is based only on logic and reason and not evidence.