Atheism is unreasonable

[Mudhammam]

Don't know, don't care. It is irrelevant to where did DNA come from and the fact that science can't tell us anything regarding origins.

Science is the only method that can tell us anything about origins, dip shit. You're stupid revelations, on the other hand, only tell us about one thing: you.

No. Explain to me how consciousness first originated..then you will be talking some good shit.

You first. But no magic allowed.

Doesn't make a damn of a difference. Speak of cosmology all you want, the infinity problem applies to anything.

But we are not here because the past is infinite, and that is the whole freakin' point. If the past was infinite, then we wouldn't be here...and you have yet to refute the analogy, which means that I must be on to something here.

No, because no one is claiming that God endured through past infinity.

I can understand your difficulty with God's alleged infinity because of the infinity problem applying to "anything," as you admit, but surely I did not imagine you would concede that God must then have a finite past. This is very interesting. So, God is not infinite... or God does not have a past? If God does not have a past, then you're basically saying that God has never created anything because such action requires change from a prior state of non-action. Or you're declaring that all actions of God are ever-present. God always was and will forever be: creating the Universe, condemning sinners before their temporal birth, and impregnating virgins? I mean, how ridiculous do you want to sound? And since you've established the requirements that, like a quantum vacuum, "there has to be space for it to operate in, and there has to be time at which it operates," then this finite God of yours is in fact quite useless for the purposes you've sought here.

No, because each step you takes represents an event that comes to past...and if you can't reach infinity step by step moving forward, then there couldn't have been an infinite amount of steps which lead to your births moving forward on an infinite time line. It is the same shit, there isn't a bit of difference. There is no way you can ADMIT that you will never reach infinity if you if you take an infinite amount of steps, but yet believe that the event of your birth can come to past if there was an infinite number of events which preceded it.

This is called the taxi cab fallacy.

That's cute that Christian apologists make up their own fallacies now.
My guess is that this is some variation of Schopenhauer's remarks that "The law of causality is therefore not so obliging as to allow itself to be used like a cab which we dismiss after we reach our destination." This is great. You borrow an invented fallacy to argue in favor of a "necessary first cause" that derives its origin from a philosopher who explicitly used it to argue against a First Cause.
If there's no absolute beginning of time, that doesn't mean that an event in time could never arrive. It means that one can only traverse an arbitrarily chosen set within the sequence of events. The problem is not logical impossibility but inconceivability (which, of course, your God fails to assist--as usual).

Then it doesn't have the explanatory value needed to explain life, information, and consciousness.

...As opposed to your explanation which is just that life, information, and consciousness exist...because they HAVE TO EXIST!!!!!! NECESSARILY!!! That's invaluable.

What I am saying is it is logically impossible for time to be infinitely long in the past. Logically impossible. No matter what you say about cosmology, quantum mechanics..nothing can help you in this regard. A timeless first cause is necessary. No escapes. Now of course, you can continue to deny it all you want, but there should be no reason why you can't answer a simple analogy if it is in fact what actually happened lol.

Define cause.
Define time.
Define necessary.
I do not perceive any cogency in your use of these terms. Necessity applies to an effect that has a sufficient ground. Cause denotes change. What cause or change occurred in your "first cause" to move it to action at all? Oh look, an infinite regress again.

You have established neither the meaning nor the necessity of your "unchanged change" that exists irregardless of time.