Argument from Reason?

[robvalue]

Faulty or incorrect premises is a good enough rebuttal. If it starts off with shit, you don't need to go any further.

Almost always, these things start with something either incoherent/incorrect as assumptions, or else a massive oversimplification of scientific theory. For example, "Everything has a cause." You can't write stuff like that and expect to be taken seriously. You can't apply the day to day logic we use for dealing with massive groups of matter we call "cars" and "front door keys" and apply them to quantum mechanics; especially as you approach the plank time where everything goes out the window regarding our understanding. It's literally saying, "Fuck science. This is how it is, it's really simple."