Refuting Evolution

[Angrboda]

Refutation I

The strongest and most spelling refutation will be..................................

My proof of God existence

Shall we revisit that proof?

Part II
Then to prove the necessity for a creator
Assuming that Existence E=U+G where U is the universe and G is another object/deity (which can be 0 )
(E = Existence, U=Known Universe, G=something external to the universe)
According to Axiom 1; the universe states are dynamic not constant
As the universe is part of the existence (or all of it) then Existence is dynamic as well (i.e. can be represented by a function)
E(t)=U(t)+G

In addition as proved time itself had a start which means that that the universe state U(0) was not a function at all it was either nothing or a constant; taking Limit as t-->0 U=C or U= 0
As U(0) was constant then G must exist and be dynamic as well G≠0 Ʌ G=G(p)
The correct formula should be E(t,p)=T U(t)+G(p); p is another parameter that changes the states of G
A complete Universe function must include another parameter to change from constant to dynamic at t=0 E(0,p)=C+G(p)
It should be E(t,p)=T U(t)+G(p)
G must exist and did created/changed the universe at its beginning
We can call this parameter the actions of a creator (G)

(This part is a proof by contradiction, based on the definition of
static vs. dynamic (constant vs. variable))

Asserting that U(0) was either nothing or a constant is incorrect. U(0) is technically undefined, mathematically speaking, as there is no possible state of U such that there exists a U(t) which is equivalent to your hypothetical interpretation of the meaning of U(0). Since the rest follows from assuming that U(0) is defined and has a value, the rest is simply wrong. Even if your assumptions were valid (they aren't; see uniformitarianism), your make-believe mathematical interpretations aren't correct either physically or mathematically.

Thank you, and have a nice day.