There are fundamental differences between asking to prove where God came from and proving where biological life came from. We both recognize the existence of biological life. We know there was a time when biological life did not exist. Me saying that biological life was created and you saying it came about on its own is like: two people who say that biological life was created; one saying the creator was created and another saying it came about on its own.
You do not recognize the existence of a creator of the biological life in question. There is now way of knowing if there was a time when the creator did not exist. We do know that biological life did not exist and came into being at one point.
I'm not asking you to prove biological life exists. My assertion that biological life is evidence that God exists is in response to the challenge that God does not exist. To attack the evidence I submit by challenging the origin of God(b-life creator) does not address the evidence. The fact remains, biological life does exist.
You are acting like you challenging me to show where God came from is the same thing. If you recognize the existence of God then it is the same thing. The problem is that if you do then you are posing a response to a challenge that does not exist. Your challenge is paradoxal. Mine is not.
I think the former more likely, and so would a class of five year olds, which is a good way of seeing stupid arguements. Try it some time.
Ok
If you gain some satifsfaction from saying 'entropy' when you are asserting that something complex and orgainsed (god) came from nothing, fine, but I don;t see how it makes your arguement any stronger.
No I did not say that. You said that. Apparently you understand the second law of thermodynamics. The question:
Which one is entropic?
was directly attached to this statement by you,
I am saying things started simple and grew complex. Your belief requires complexity (god) from the outset. Which makes more sense?
You asked which one made more sense. I cited physics 101. You apparently thought that decreasing entropy would convince me that your theory was more plausible. A classroom of physicists blah blah blah