The argument from universal causation is flawed because it is dependent upon assumptions and magic... It is BASED upon the idea that there MUST be a "Creator" and that is not a place for any Scientific Theory to start off at.
This is William Lane Craig's argument:
1 Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2 The universe began to exist.
3 Therefore, the universe has a cause.
4 This cause is the God of Classical Theism, and is a personal being, because He chose to create the universe.
This is a fiction on par with the story of Jona and the
????????????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????????????
????????????????????
William Lane Craig http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Lane_Craig is an American analytic philosopher, philosophical theologian, and Christian apologist. He has no qualification to comment on Physics, Astronomy, String Theorem, etc. etc. etc.
- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -
? Debunking the cosmological argument for god
http://blog.case.edu/singham/2011/08/22/debunking_the_cosmological_argument_for_god
? The Cosmological Argument (debunked)
http://allalltor.wordpress.com/2011/09/10/the-cosmological-argument-debunked/
P1: Everything that begins to exist has a cause
This premise is derived from Newtonian physics. It is fair to say that Newton was right in his physics, but it’s not a complete picture. Although in Newtonian physics the premise is right, in quantum mechanics it is not. Quantum mechanics has a-causal components. Therefore it is not true that everything that begins to exist has a cause.
- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -
Provide evidence or PLEASE STFU.
- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -
? Philosophic burden of proof
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof
? Legal burden of proof
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_burden_of_proof
? Null Hypothesis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_hypothesis
- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -