Atheism; An Intellectual Dead End

[Czernobog]

my point is science does not answer the question 'what is the original cause?'

Ok. and until just over 100 years ago science couldn't answer the question "how does the sun work?"

Science isn't an object or a source...it's a process and method of discovery and knowledge.

No...we don't know how the universe came about or the details. Maybe we never will. But "Goddidit" isn't an answer. It doesn't mean anything more than "We don't know."
If God created the universe...how? and where was God's existence before the universe was created, and can that even be explained in a way that would make sense?

"Goddidit" is an answer.....if there is a first cause/supreme being then why not call it God? 'nothing' sure doesn't cut it....

also who or what do you think made the universe so orderly?....who or what created all the scientific laws that govern our physical world? scientists sure don't have the answer to that one...

You get that the universe isn't orderly, right?

It looks pretty darn orderly to me.

If you say so..

 

[Czernobog]

And, as ahs been repeatedly demonstrated, your "observations" are decidedly out of date, overly simplistic, and lacking in understanding:

Although the Big Bang singularity arises directly and unavoidably from the mathematics of general relativity, some scientists see it as problematic because the math can explain only what happened immediately after—not at or before—the singularity.

"The Big Bang singularity is the most serious problem of general relativity because the laws of physics appear to break down there," Ahmed Farag Ali at Benha University and the Zewail City of Science and Technology, both in Egypt, told Phys.org.

Ali and coauthor Saurya Das at the University of Lethbridge in Alberta, Canada, have shown in a paper published in Physics Letters B that the Big Bang singularity can be resolved by their new model in which the universe has no beginning and no end.​

No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning

You really shouldn't try to to make definitive statements about the nature of the universe with only a high school physics understanding of cosmology.

Thank you for proving my point in my signature. "They worship science but are the first to reject it when it does not suit their purposes."

I reject nothing. I updated your outdated understanding. Guess what? 50 years ago one would reasonably have insisted that petroleum was the only way to power the engine of an automobile, because that was our technical understanding of the time. However were you to try to suggest that, to day, I would quickly, and easily demonstrate how incorrect you are. That wouldn't be "denying science, or engineering"; it would be demonstrating that your understanding of such is woefully outdated.

As it is with your understanding of physics, and cosmology.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

My understanding of understanding of physics and cosmology is just fine. I wasn't the one arguing that gravitons negated the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

I didn't say it negates it; I said it bypasses it. There is a difference.
I also asked you a question, which you refused to answer, b3ecause it destroys your position. When massless matter is converted into enegy how mauch mass is lost in the conversion?

Bipasses it? You mean it has no effect on the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics like I have been telling you all along?

What question did I miss? Don't be an idiot. The only thing you destroyed was your ego.

I'll ask again: When massless matter is converted into enegy how much mass is lost in the conversion?

 

[sealybobo]

My comprehension is fine. It is you who does not understand the implication of my question. How do gravitons affect matter which has mass as it pertains to mass to energy transfers and the resulting loss of heat which reduces the usable energy of the system. It doesn't, dumbass. You lose, again.

How does this prove god exists?

It won't for you. Nothing will.

He is convinced that because there is a finite limit on matter with mass in the universe that there is a finite limit to the ammount of matter that can be converted into energy. Thus, it is his contention that the universe must have both a beginning, and an end. As such the agent for the "beginning" of the universe is God. Actually, he knows that this is not true, but he keeps insisting on discounting massless matter, so that he does not have to find some way to fit that into his matter to energy conversion theory.

I know what he's experiencing.

the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.

cog·ni·tive dis·so·nance

I have found the best way to get over my cognitive dissonance is a nice drive in my vette after a round of golf at the club. I think I'll do that tomorrow.

Well I can see how you feel blessed. Some believe for that reason but I know other theists who would kill themselves if they thought this was all there was.

 

[ding]

my point is science does not answer the question 'what is the original cause?'

You are preseming that there was an "original cause", or that one was necessary. And your support for this claim is...?

isn't that a valid scientific question?

No, because it infers a violation of the First law of Thermodynamics. It implies that there can be an effect without a cause. "God created the universe," Okay. From whence came God. In order for this "God" to have existed, something must have created it. However, that would negate it being God; rather it is just another effect of some other cause.

The only solution to the first cause is the eternal.

So, your solution to the illogic of your position is special pleading. Every effect must have a cause...except your mythical God. He's "special". That's what is known as a logical fallacy, my friend.

Good Lord, must you continually misstate my positions? Oh, yeah... you do. Actually if you notice I didn't state God, lol. I defined the solution and you made the connection to God. On a side note, our equations breakdown at the singularity and yield infinities. It seems that even our equations know the answer to the first cause.

 

[ding]

How does this prove god exists?

It won't for you. Nothing will.

He is convinced that because there is a finite limit on matter with mass in the universe that there is a finite limit to the ammount of matter that can be converted into energy. Thus, it is his contention that the universe must have both a beginning, and an end. As such the agent for the "beginning" of the universe is God. Actually, he knows that this is not true, but he keeps insisting on discounting massless matter, so that he does not have to find some way to fit that into his matter to energy conversion theory.

I know what he's experiencing.

the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.

cog·ni·tive dis·so·nance

I have found the best way to get over my cognitive dissonance is a nice drive in my vette after a round of golf at the club. I think I'll do that tomorrow.

Well I can see how you feel blessed. Some believe for that reason but I know other theists who would kill themselves if they thought this was all there was.

Me included. But making good choices should be rewarded. I think I'll go to my gun club after golf.

 

[sealybobo]

No, it doesn't, and your refusal to answer the question about energy conversion proves that you know you're wrong, and just don't want to admit it.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

What exactly do gravitons have to do with matter which has mass? How do gravitons prevent heat loss when matter is converted to energy?

Okay. Let's try this another way. Let us assume that every bit of matter containing mass in the entire universe has been converted into energy. Is it, at that point still possible to convert matter to energy?

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

That would have been the conditions at the Big Bang. They would have all been subatomic particles. Most likely nearly equal amounts of matter and antimatter. They would have rapidly formed hydrogen and helium. At least the matter that was left over. The reality is that we have an observable universe that we believe is at least 14 billion years old. We have observed that all points are moving away from us. The theory of relativity predicts the Big Bang. The 2nd law of thermodynamics confirms that the universe has a finite age and is not infinite because there is still usable energy remaining. What the fuck do you have that proves otherwise?

Just because the universe has an age doesn't mean that another universe didn't exist 14 billion years before the big bang. We will never know that. So the answer is we don't know. We can speculate that there probably was a universe before ours, which seems plausable, or we can limit our minds and believe time itself started with our universe. Not realizing that if you are right, god too was born 14 billion years ago too. Is that what you are saying? Well then what was go doing 28 billion years ago? If all that there is is our universe, what about before the big bang? I know it is hard to wrap your brain around that and truly the answer is that this time before time is unknowable. But that doesn't mean it didn't exist. But funny you will write it off but not god.

Seriously, what was god doing 1999 billion years ago?

The universe we are in right now... had a beginning. Yes, time literally began when space and time came into existence. That's why they say space AND time. It is represented as four dimensions. There was no such thing as time or space before that. That's what we know.

If I can't get you to accept that, how in the hell do you believe it is possible that I could convince you of God?

Because you're leaving out before our time and space. Was God born 14 billion years ago too? You think this is his first or last universe?

Why do you put God in a box?

 

[ding]

Thank you for proving my point in my signature. "They worship science but are the first to reject it when it does not suit their purposes."

I reject nothing. I updated your outdated understanding. Guess what? 50 years ago one would reasonably have insisted that petroleum was the only way to power the engine of an automobile, because that was our technical understanding of the time. However were you to try to suggest that, to day, I would quickly, and easily demonstrate how incorrect you are. That wouldn't be "denying science, or engineering"; it would be demonstrating that your understanding of such is woefully outdated.

As it is with your understanding of physics, and cosmology.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

My understanding of understanding of physics and cosmology is just fine. I wasn't the one arguing that gravitons negated the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

I didn't say it negates it; I said it bypasses it. There is a difference.
I also asked you a question, which you refused to answer, b3ecause it destroys your position. When massless matter is converted into enegy how mauch mass is lost in the conversion?

Bipasses it? You mean it has no effect on the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics like I have been telling you all along?

What question did I miss? Don't be an idiot. The only thing you destroyed was your ego.

I'll ask again: When massless matter is converted into energy how much mass is lost in the conversion?

None. What does that have to do when matter that has mass is converted into energy?

 

[ding]

What exactly do gravitons have to do with matter which has mass? How do gravitons prevent heat loss when matter is converted to energy?

Okay. Let's try this another way. Let us assume that every bit of matter containing mass in the entire universe has been converted into energy. Is it, at that point still possible to convert matter to energy?

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

That would have been the conditions at the Big Bang. They would have all been subatomic particles. Most likely nearly equal amounts of matter and antimatter. They would have rapidly formed hydrogen and helium. At least the matter that was left over. The reality is that we have an observable universe that we believe is at least 14 billion years old. We have observed that all points are moving away from us. The theory of relativity predicts the Big Bang. The 2nd law of thermodynamics confirms that the universe has a finite age and is not infinite because there is still usable energy remaining. What the fuck do you have that proves otherwise?

Just because the universe has an age doesn't mean that another universe didn't exist 14 billion years before the big bang. We will never know that. So the answer is we don't know. We can speculate that there probably was a universe before ours, which seems plausable, or we can limit our minds and believe time itself started with our universe. Not realizing that if you are right, god too was born 14 billion years ago too. Is that what you are saying? Well then what was go doing 28 billion years ago? If all that there is is our universe, what about before the big bang? I know it is hard to wrap your brain around that and truly the answer is that this time before time is unknowable. But that doesn't mean it didn't exist. But funny you will write it off but not god.

Seriously, what was god doing 1999 billion years ago?

The universe we are in right now... had a beginning. Yes, time literally began when space and time came into existence. That's why they say space AND time. It is represented as four dimensions. There was no such thing as time or space before that. That's what we know.

If I can't get you to accept that, how in the hell do you believe it is possible that I could convince you of God?

Because you're leaving out before our time and space. Was God born 14 billion years ago too? You think this is his first or last universe?

Why do you put God in a box?

Now you are just being silly.

 

[sealybobo]

D

So, lemme get this straight. You believe the universe is without end, but has a beginning? Really? That is your contention? Care to explain how that works? You are suggesting that it is only finite in one direction, but, in the other direction it is infinite. So...it is your contention that the universe is both simultaneously finite, and infinite. Neat trick...

massless matter is still matter...even if it is infinite what created it?

since nothing can create itself why does matter exist?

What created god?

In fact, something can come from nothing and we are able to observe it in the form of virtual particles and quantum vacuum fluctuations. They explain why the early universe lacked uniformity and provided the seeds for the emergence of structure [2][3]. These quantum phenomena are also causeless in the sense that they are objectively and irreducibly random, a fact confirmed by tests of non-local realism and Bell’s Theorem.

Why there is no god

God is existence. Nothing created existence. Existence like truth and love are eternal.

I looked up the word existence and it didn't mention God. So existence doesn't help your claims about the god that we know and discuss.

How is love eternal? Tell that to the martians who lived 3 billion years agoo and thought the universe was made for them. Right now they are dustt. They were lucky to have lived too.

I'll give thanks to whatever put us here. Whatever that is? Nature? I'll worship nature. Do you think God cares if I call him nature?

You can't give thanks to something you aren't thankful for. I don't think He cares what you call Him as long as you call Him. Love has always existed as the native state of the trinity.

Whether or not you believe God is existence is irrelevant, He is. His words, not mine.

His word? When did he say it?

 

[Czernobog]

You are preseming that there was an "original cause", or that one was necessary. And your support for this claim is...?

isn't that a valid scientific question?

No, because it infers a violation of the First law of Thermodynamics. It implies that there can be an effect without a cause. "God created the universe," Okay. From whence came God. In order for this "God" to have existed, something must have created it. However, that would negate it being God; rather it is just another effect of some other cause.

The only solution to the first cause is the eternal.

So, your solution to the illogic of your position is special pleading. Every effect must have a cause...except your mythical God. He's "special". That's what is known as a logical fallacy, my friend.

Good Lord, must you continually misstate my positions? Oh, yeah... you do. Actually if you notice I didn't state God, lol. I defined the solution and you made the connection to God. On a side note, our equations breakdown at the singularity and yield infinities. It seems that even our equations know the answer to the first cause.

And your solution is a logical fallacy. the "first cause' is speciual. It's different. I don't care what you label that difference ("eternal"), it is still a texbook case of special pleading. As to your not mentioning God in that particular post, it is irrelevant. Your entire argument has been to "prove" the existence of God. So what, now, suddenly, that "first cause" isn't God? What is it? Fred?

 

[ding]

D

massless matter is still matter...even if it is infinite what created it?

since nothing can create itself why does matter exist?

What created god?

In fact, something can come from nothing and we are able to observe it in the form of virtual particles and quantum vacuum fluctuations. They explain why the early universe lacked uniformity and provided the seeds for the emergence of structure [2][3]. These quantum phenomena are also causeless in the sense that they are objectively and irreducibly random, a fact confirmed by tests of non-local realism and Bell’s Theorem.

Why there is no god

God is existence. Nothing created existence. Existence like truth and love are eternal.

I looked up the word existence and it didn't mention God. So existence doesn't help your claims about the god that we know and discuss.

How is love eternal? Tell that to the martians who lived 3 billion years agoo and thought the universe was made for them. Right now they are dustt. They were lucky to have lived too.

I'll give thanks to whatever put us here. Whatever that is? Nature? I'll worship nature. Do you think God cares if I call him nature?

You can't give thanks to something you aren't thankful for. I don't think He cares what you call Him as long as you call Him. Love has always existed as the native state of the trinity.

Whether or not you believe God is existence is irrelevant, He is. His words, not mine.

His word? When did he say it?

When they asked Him His name?

 

[sealybobo]

Okay. Let's try this another way. Let us assume that every bit of matter containing mass in the entire universe has been converted into energy. Is it, at that point still possible to convert matter to energy?

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

That would have been the conditions at the Big Bang. They would have all been subatomic particles. Most likely nearly equal amounts of matter and antimatter. They would have rapidly formed hydrogen and helium. At least the matter that was left over. The reality is that we have an observable universe that we believe is at least 14 billion years old. We have observed that all points are moving away from us. The theory of relativity predicts the Big Bang. The 2nd law of thermodynamics confirms that the universe has a finite age and is not infinite because there is still usable energy remaining. What the fuck do you have that proves otherwise?

Just because the universe has an age doesn't mean that another universe didn't exist 14 billion years before the big bang. We will never know that. So the answer is we don't know. We can speculate that there probably was a universe before ours, which seems plausable, or we can limit our minds and believe time itself started with our universe. Not realizing that if you are right, god too was born 14 billion years ago too. Is that what you are saying? Well then what was go doing 28 billion years ago? If all that there is is our universe, what about before the big bang? I know it is hard to wrap your brain around that and truly the answer is that this time before time is unknowable. But that doesn't mean it didn't exist. But funny you will write it off but not god.

Seriously, what was god doing 1999 billion years ago?

The universe we are in right now... had a beginning. Yes, time literally began when space and time came into existence. That's why they say space AND time. It is represented as four dimensions. There was no such thing as time or space before that. That's what we know.

If I can't get you to accept that, how in the hell do you believe it is possible that I could convince you of God?

Because you're leaving out before our time and space. Was God born 14 billion years ago too? You think this is his first or last universe?

Why do you put God in a box?

Now you are just being silly.

That's your answer? Those were serious questions. If you can't answer them that's cognitive dissonance

 

[ding]

isn't that a valid scientific question?

No, because it infers a violation of the First law of Thermodynamics. It implies that there can be an effect without a cause. "God created the universe," Okay. From whence came God. In order for this "God" to have existed, something must have created it. However, that would negate it being God; rather it is just another effect of some other cause.

The only solution to the first cause is the eternal.

So, your solution to the illogic of your position is special pleading. Every effect must have a cause...except your mythical God. He's "special". That's what is known as a logical fallacy, my friend.

Good Lord, must you continually misstate my positions? Oh, yeah... you do. Actually if you notice I didn't state God, lol. I defined the solution and you made the connection to God. On a side note, our equations breakdown at the singularity and yield infinities. It seems that even our equations know the answer to the first cause.

And your solution is a logical fallacy. the "first cause' is speciual. It's different. I don't care what you label that difference ("eternal"), it is still a texbook case of special pleading. As to your not mentioning God in that particular post, it is irrelevant. Your entire argument has been to "prove" the existence of God. So what, now, suddenly, that "first cause" isn't God? What is it? Fred?

Logically.... there is no other solution except something that is eternal.

 

[ding]

That would have been the conditions at the Big Bang. They would have all been subatomic particles. Most likely nearly equal amounts of matter and antimatter. They would have rapidly formed hydrogen and helium. At least the matter that was left over. The reality is that we have an observable universe that we believe is at least 14 billion years old. We have observed that all points are moving away from us. The theory of relativity predicts the Big Bang. The 2nd law of thermodynamics confirms that the universe has a finite age and is not infinite because there is still usable energy remaining. What the fuck do you have that proves otherwise?

Just because the universe has an age doesn't mean that another universe didn't exist 14 billion years before the big bang. We will never know that. So the answer is we don't know. We can speculate that there probably was a universe before ours, which seems plausable, or we can limit our minds and believe time itself started with our universe. Not realizing that if you are right, god too was born 14 billion years ago too. Is that what you are saying? Well then what was go doing 28 billion years ago? If all that there is is our universe, what about before the big bang? I know it is hard to wrap your brain around that and truly the answer is that this time before time is unknowable. But that doesn't mean it didn't exist. But funny you will write it off but not god.

Seriously, what was god doing 1999 billion years ago?

The universe we are in right now... had a beginning. Yes, time literally began when space and time came into existence. That's why they say space AND time. It is represented as four dimensions. There was no such thing as time or space before that. That's what we know.

If I can't get you to accept that, how in the hell do you believe it is possible that I could convince you of God?

Because you're leaving out before our time and space. Was God born 14 billion years ago too? You think this is his first or last universe?

Why do you put God in a box?

Now you are just being silly.

That's your answer? Those were serious questions. If you can't answer them that's cognitive dissonance

No. They weren't serious questions.

 

[sealybobo]

D

What created god?

In fact, something can come from nothing and we are able to observe it in the form of virtual particles and quantum vacuum fluctuations. They explain why the early universe lacked uniformity and provided the seeds for the emergence of structure [2][3]. These quantum phenomena are also causeless in the sense that they are objectively and irreducibly random, a fact confirmed by tests of non-local realism and Bell’s Theorem.

Why there is no god

God is existence. Nothing created existence. Existence like truth and love are eternal.

I looked up the word existence and it didn't mention God. So existence doesn't help your claims about the god that we know and discuss.

How is love eternal? Tell that to the martians who lived 3 billion years agoo and thought the universe was made for them. Right now they are dustt. They were lucky to have lived too.

I'll give thanks to whatever put us here. Whatever that is? Nature? I'll worship nature. Do you think God cares if I call him nature?

You can't give thanks to something you aren't thankful for. I don't think He cares what you call Him as long as you call Him. Love has always existed as the native state of the trinity.

Whether or not you believe God is existence is irrelevant, He is. His words, not mine.

His word? When did he say it?

When they asked Him His name?

Who asked him?

 

[ding]

D

God is existence. Nothing created existence. Existence like truth and love are eternal.

I looked up the word existence and it didn't mention God. So existence doesn't help your claims about the god that we know and discuss.

How is love eternal? Tell that to the martians who lived 3 billion years agoo and thought the universe was made for them. Right now they are dustt. They were lucky to have lived too.

I'll give thanks to whatever put us here. Whatever that is? Nature? I'll worship nature. Do you think God cares if I call him nature?

You can't give thanks to something you aren't thankful for. I don't think He cares what you call Him as long as you call Him. Love has always existed as the native state of the trinity.

Whether or not you believe God is existence is irrelevant, He is. His words, not mine.

His word? When did he say it?

When they asked Him His name?

Who asked him?

Can't remember. I just remember what He answered. It was kind of important.

 

[Czernobog]

No, because it infers a violation of the First law of Thermodynamics. It implies that there can be an effect without a cause. "God created the universe," Okay. From whence came God. In order for this "God" to have existed, something must have created it. However, that would negate it being God; rather it is just another effect of some other cause.

The only solution to the first cause is the eternal.

So, your solution to the illogic of your position is special pleading. Every effect must have a cause...except your mythical God. He's "special". That's what is known as a logical fallacy, my friend.

Good Lord, must you continually misstate my positions? Oh, yeah... you do. Actually if you notice I didn't state God, lol. I defined the solution and you made the connection to God. On a side note, our equations breakdown at the singularity and yield infinities. It seems that even our equations know the answer to the first cause.

And your solution is a logical fallacy. the "first cause' is speciual. It's different. I don't care what you label that difference ("eternal"), it is still a texbook case of special pleading. As to your not mentioning God in that particular post, it is irrelevant. Your entire argument has been to "prove" the existence of God. So what, now, suddenly, that "first cause" isn't God? What is it? Fred?

Logically.... there is no other solution except something that is eternal.

Actually, there is. That you are wrong about the existence of a "First Cause". Then there is no need tfor a special pleading, now is there?

 

[ding]

The only solution to the first cause is the eternal.

So, your solution to the illogic of your position is special pleading. Every effect must have a cause...except your mythical God. He's "special". That's what is known as a logical fallacy, my friend.

Good Lord, must you continually misstate my positions? Oh, yeah... you do. Actually if you notice I didn't state God, lol. I defined the solution and you made the connection to God. On a side note, our equations breakdown at the singularity and yield infinities. It seems that even our equations know the answer to the first cause.

And your solution is a logical fallacy. the "first cause' is speciual. It's different. I don't care what you label that difference ("eternal"), it is still a texbook case of special pleading. As to your not mentioning God in that particular post, it is irrelevant. Your entire argument has been to "prove" the existence of God. So what, now, suddenly, that "first cause" isn't God? What is it? Fred?

Logically.... there is no other solution except something that is eternal.

Actually, there is. That you are wrong about the existence of a "First Cause". Then there is no need tfor a special pleading, now is there?

Logically... there is a first cause.

 

[sealybobo]

Just because the universe has an age doesn't mean that another universe didn't exist 14 billion years before the big bang. We will never know that. So the answer is we don't know. We can speculate that there probably was a universe before ours, which seems plausable, or we can limit our minds and believe time itself started with our universe. Not realizing that if you are right, god too was born 14 billion years ago too. Is that what you are saying? Well then what was go doing 28 billion years ago? If all that there is is our universe, what about before the big bang? I know it is hard to wrap your brain around that and truly the answer is that this time before time is unknowable. But that doesn't mean it didn't exist. But funny you will write it off but not god.

Seriously, what was god doing 1999 billion years ago?

The universe we are in right now... had a beginning. Yes, time literally began when space and time came into existence. That's why they say space AND time. It is represented as four dimensions. There was no such thing as time or space before that. That's what we know.

If I can't get you to accept that, how in the hell do you believe it is possible that I could convince you of God?

Because you're leaving out before our time and space. Was God born 14 billion years ago too? You think this is his first or last universe?

Why do you put God in a box?

Now you are just being silly.

That's your answer? Those were serious questions. If you can't answer them that's cognitive dissonance

No. They weren't serious questions.

Yes they were. You can't imagine time before our universe. I can even though it's unknowable I believe that time existed and so must you if you believe God is eternal.

I just think time and space is eternal. No God necessary

 

[Czernobog]

So, your solution to the illogic of your position is special pleading. Every effect must have a cause...except your mythical God. He's "special". That's what is known as a logical fallacy, my friend.

Good Lord, must you continually misstate my positions? Oh, yeah... you do. Actually if you notice I didn't state God, lol. I defined the solution and you made the connection to God. On a side note, our equations breakdown at the singularity and yield infinities. It seems that even our equations know the answer to the first cause.

And your solution is a logical fallacy. the "first cause' is speciual. It's different. I don't care what you label that difference ("eternal"), it is still a texbook case of special pleading. As to your not mentioning God in that particular post, it is irrelevant. Your entire argument has been to "prove" the existence of God. So what, now, suddenly, that "first cause" isn't God? What is it? Fred?

Logically.... there is no other solution except something that is eternal.

Actually, there is. That you are wrong about the existence of a "First Cause". Then there is no need tfor a special pleading, now is there?

Logically... there is a first cause.

Logically there can't be a First Cause. Unless you are suggesting that the laws of physics are wrong, and that every effect doesn't require a cause. I find it interesting how you plead your high school physics, right up until they don't support your case.