Terrible Atheist Argument #1

[Vincenzo Vinny G.]

Page 1 of this thread

It was on page two for me.

Started off with typical butthurt, which looks like a combination of anger, resentment and hate.

Misunderstood the post as a reference to the kalam, as opposed to a more general first cause argument. By the way there is no such thing as "kalam's argument."

Tried to hide the lack of substance with words like "plonkers", "yonks", "boink" and other sounds you associate with circus clowns.

Your first objection was "We have no real (as opposed to fake? -V) experience with..." I don't even need to finish the sentence to call it false as we reasonably accept things that we don't have experience of all the time, from quantum mechanics to the big bang.

You then say "We know of nothing that..." doesn't matter what comes after it, if the argument is "We don't know of something that is like P, therefore P cannot exist." the argument is invalid as possibility is not dependent on scientific knowledge.

In fact we can say that if at the speed of light time stops, then something that moves at the speed of light throughout its lifetime transcends time, although this is just an interesting thought, not a proper counterexample.

There's no word such as hypothetics.

And at this point I think I want to take a break, my brain can only handle so much.