Has the Mythical Unicorn of Materials Science Finally Been Found?

The argument there gets a bit more complex, but you can get the basic point by looking at entropy. An unordered system is not likely to become ordered over time, and it cannot do so over an infinite time, which it would need to (it would eventually degenerate into a final stable state, unlike the universe we see around us with non-homogeneous elements).

You've already noted the primary problem with this argument: over time. Outside of this particular time-space bubble, please explain what entropy would even mean.

But, to your first point, God didn't create himself, he simply always was. Eternal uncreated existence is required.

Non sequitur. You haven't demonstrated that "eternal uncreated existence is required." Before you can make the claim "X always was," you first have to establish that "X is," or at the very least that "X was." Moreover, you are applying a loaded term("god") to a state about which you can generate no useful inference. I'll go into this more in the next section.

You can then argue that that thing has to be what theologians call "god" (which isn't particularly "human-like" except is certain very limited ways), but like I say, that is an argument in philosophy.

And this is where the cosmological proofs fail. It is simply a bad attempt at a bit of rhetorical slight of hand. There is no data to support the idea that anything which exists outside of our universe is in any way linked to the human concepts of "god." To attempt to link the two(or more, depending on intent) concepts is another non sequitur, when it is not downright deceptive

I would argue that most of the scientists you hear arguing for atheism have absolutely no clue what they are talking about, because they assume that if it exists in any way, it can be reached scientifically, and that anything that cannot be reached scientifically, cannot exist (that combined with their reluctance to trust the authority of anyone or anything they can't understand tends to lead them to atheism).

Anything that has no measurable effect on the universe is irrelevant to any discussion about the universe. None of the "supernatural" entities postulated by various human cultures have been demonstrated to have a measurable effect on the universe. If you can demonstrate such interference, you will gain the allegience of every honest skeptic. Until then, if you press your case sans evidence, then do no be surprised when you are relegated to the same bin as every other crank.

Furthermore, the general claims presented these days are not against some lofty "philosopher's god," but rather the very real organizations which are working towards their own social goals. And these organizations are virtually uniform in making concrete claims which are easily refutable. The moment the claim "god wants/will do X" is made, you have now stepped away from the shelter of ultimate ignorance and you'd better be able to support your claims.

You can't prove they do (except God, or at least some "supernatural" thing that follows the conditions required to create our universe) but that would be where the whole "faith" thing comes into play.

See above about your "god" comment. As for faith(in the religious sense; don't bother trying to conflate it with trust), I consider it to be odious and one of the worst afflictions of mankind. All too often, it is used to engender suffering and fear.

Source: http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdotScience/~3/xwGCYAvD0oE/story01.htm

college football recruiting bjork national signing day 2012 landon collins dorial green beckham mike kelly kristen bell