"There are kids who view this site." Then their parents should be actually watching their kids then, right? Why the f*ck is it everybody else's job to make sure Johhny can't find anything to jackoff to?
Your refutation is correct, but your conclusion is wrong. It is possible to prove a negative, but not through appeal to evidence. If the assertion (in this case god) is self-contradictory, then it can be disprove by appeal to logic.
For example I cannot disprove that cricles have four equal-angled corners (a square-circle) by appeal to evidence- I can't collect every circle in the universe and prove it. However, the disproof can be achieved using logic- but only because the claimed concept is self-contradictory and nonsensical. The concept of god is the same.
As silly as it is to bother with the medieval First Cause argument- for a more detailed, explict demolition of it, read George H. Smith's "Atheism: The Case Against God". The book also refutes much better and much more sophisticated arguments for god than this.
Are you kidding me? The First Cause Argument was laughed off the stage a long time ago. This is nothing new.
You are making an arbitrary assertion, with nothing to back it up, by claiming that the Universe needs a beginning. The singualrity doesn't prove the existence began, merely that the universe was once very different. Read the most basic philosophy on the subject. Massive failure.
Oh, and there doesn't have to actual collision of matter for this to screw us... the massive changes in gravity could shoot our system out of the galaxy or alter Earth's orbit. Plus there may be huge changes in the local radiation levels.
Spalt's recent comments: