"Undefeated" Apologetic Argument

[Neo-Scholastic]

How would you refute this guy?

With lolz.

P1 - Both ''STE'' and ''SCPNCEU'' are irrational, illogical, and have no evidence.

That's right. STE is a known falsehood: space/time began with the expansion of the singularity and no-one with any knowledge holds the position implied by SCPNCEU.

P2 - If you deny or disbelieve in an ''Uncreated Creator'' option as the cause of the universe, then your only two options are''STE'' and ''SCPNCEU''.

Nonsense, false dichotomy. Because STE is a flasehood, it can't be a position of any kind. And since SCPNCEU is a nonsense, in fact, neither of the proposed options are options at all. Pure misdirection.

P3 - ''Atheists'' deny or disbelieve in an ''Uncreated Creator'' option as the cause of the universe.

I do because this is special pleading and a logically incoherent concept. Other atheists may or may not.

T - ''Atheists'' are irrational, illogical, and have no evidence.

This conclusion has nothing to do with the propositions! A generalisation of atheists cannot be achieved from an examination of misunderstandings (or lies) regarding scientific knowledge that may or may not be held by individuals.

Undefeated, pah! School children can see through this nonsense.

So if the first is a known falsehood and the second is nonsense, then what is the third theory? Its okay to say I don't know...but the unmoved mover / uncaused cause seems like a viable alternative. and what gives a singularity the capacity to change? Or if the singularity embodies change what limits its creative expression to the form of this specific universe?