Yawn. First cause arguments have been around forever, and they've never been particularly convincing, let alone indisputable. For one thing, if everything needs a cause, then wouldn't God require a cause as well? And if you propose that God is an exception, that means exceptions are allowed, so why not just make things simpler and claim that the Universe is an exception to things requiring causes?
There's also always the strange conclusion, that doesn't follow from any of the previous premises, that we should just call this first cause "God". Why? What if the first cause was just some random quantum mechanic event. Why do we call that God? Should that really be considered God?
Oh, and P.S., humans started science. And last I checked, we ain't gods.
Before thinking about the harder,lets think about the simpler.
How we did exist from nothing.
You may say,no we know that we came from our mothers womb.
But did we realy came first from the womb ?
No,we came from the sperm and ovum.
Now everyday there are millions of sperms for each ejaculation which is by itself is just cells and not considered a living thing.
Now the fact that we came to life without the ability to produce sperms which only start to happen in puberty.
So all of a sudden everything is ready for the shoot.
Production of sperm by the testicles
strong erection and suitable penis length
vague pleasure which drive men to acheive the planned proccess of reproduction.
Did our firsr ancestors came without the need for such complex proccess,since even the born baby if left alone without care,then of course he'll die and if we put one female baby beside a male baby and left them,then both will die.
So talking about unconcious nature and that silly explanation about random mutation and natural selection and chances looks silly IMHO.
... well, we were born to choose anyway :yes: .. Debate about this, is endless
