Pack it up guys. It’s been a good run, but this kid has proven god exists, so it’s over. See you in church this Sunday.

Insert eye-roll here.

“Well, because there’s these atheists that try to say that there is no God, when in reality it takes more faith to believe that there’s no God than it does to believe that there is a God ”

That’s his argument, apparently. smh.

He's using the same tired and disproven ideas that have been argued since the existence of God was first questioned. The fact that he wraps his arguments around scientific principles of space/time and gravity make no difference. None of what he's saying demonstrates or even suggests a GOD. He insists one is real because as the son of a preacher, this mythology has been pounded into his brain and presented as truth since birth.

Here's the thing; no matter what his IQ or his level of academic achievement, the bottom line is he's trying to prove the reality of an eternal, magical superbeing who lives in the sky and wields limitless cosmic power. He's doomed to fail because his arguments are flawed at their core -- no such being does or can exist. He's literally trying to prove the reality of a fictional character. He may as well dedicate himself to proving Humpty-Dumpty.

Hopefully, he'll come to this realization one day and focus on questions of true science that still need to be answered.

I'll wait till the theory is tested and the tests come out repeatedly the same. In the meantime I'll go with Stephen Hawking

Nothing new here. The argument is “things exist,” therefore something must have created them. It’s based on the anthropomorphic preconception that things only exist if we (or something like us-an intelligence) makes them. Zero evidence for it; requires an unquestioning faith in an advanced intelligence; i.e., religion. So the logic breaks down to, “I’m religious, therefore religion is true.” Not much “genius” level thought there.

All theists maintain that they "prove" A-theists wrong, but it is always the same old argument without evidence, facts or data generally falling back on some biblical based claims.

Well we all were 11 once.....

He isn't a "genius" he's just regurgitating some crap that he read.

Pointless and useless.

Call me when he has multiple PhDs and has written a few books and developed REAL theories.

I would love to see the end result of this young man's quest. It reminds me of my own. I hope he understands the challenge of navigating past your own preconceptions and prejudices.

With his apparent intellect, I believe he'll get closer to the truth than I did. He'll either be very disappointed, or will have to change his definition of "god" to fit the evidence.

yeah but does he have his face on bubblegum card? cause you really aren't famous until you get your face on a bubble gum card.

An interesting article, and a brilliant young mind, but no proof. Not even a reasonable argument. Obviously he's intelligent enough to do amazing things scientifically and I wish him luck. But to sum up the articles thesis, It takes more faith to believe in nothing, than to believe in something. I think this is exactly what atheists disagree with. It takes "faith"to believe something without proof. Not the other way around. Our existence is proof of only one thing, that we are here. Faith presumes it's by design, science largely concludes it's by evolution. Either way, it's been thus far, and unanswerable question and i disagree that it requires any faith to not believe in a great sky monster as presented in Christian texts.

Get the kids early, and fuck em up right.

Well, props to this kid for going big. It sounds like a more nuanced version of Pascal's wager to me. He's gonna have to get some pretty compelling evidence to claim his logical framework is proof, and some of his assumptions seem a bit contrived. But he's a smart kid, and I'll read whatever he comes up with.

WHY would anyone prefer having a belief instead of having knowledge?? Having a belief about something, is no substitute for having knowledge about it.

Randy

His father is a preacher, the boy is still a little boy and he is only 11 years old.
He doesn't want to hurt his father's feelings.
The question: how this genius will think about God when we will be 30 years old?....
I am pretty sure that we will not believe in God anymore.

One aspect of his argument is that it doesn't deal with exactly what he's talking about when he uses the word "God". Even if one grants that the universe was created at some point, this says absolutely nothing whatsoever about the creator -- whoever or whatever that was. All his argument "proves", supposedly, is that something created the universe somehow. I agree that if something comes into existence at some point, then it cannot have created itself. But it's a giant leap to go from that to the idea of the Christian God.

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the universe being 13.8 billion years old, then reduced to nothing. Wouldn't that make it 13.8 billion years plus lunch? It can't be reduced if it doesn't previously assist. And to quote my favorite author, God vanished in a puff of logic.'

"We know the universe has an age, right? 13.8 billion years. So, 13.8 billion years ago, the entire universe was reduced to a singularity, a particle smaller than a quark. However, if gravity is always working, i.e.: if you jumped off this building, you’re not going to fall 15 seconds later, you’re going to fall immediately, so, if gravity was always working, and the singularity was always there […] then the universe should have no age, it should be infinitely old. But it’s not, it’s 13.8 billion years old. And something can’t come from nothing, because it would have to exist in order to cause itself to exist, which is illogical. So, therefore, something other must have created the singularity, and that something other me observe as God."

If he's a genius and is logical, then I'm Santa Clause.

Our OBSERVABLE universe is about 13.8b years old. Scientists have evidence that is CLOSEST to what they believe to be the truth about our observable universe beginning with a singularity. This is contested though. It would be like having a massive rock the size of 1b Suns exploding and then going on to form planets in several different galaxies. The massive rock had an existence before it exploded, but after it exploded it created new "existences" in the form of many many many planets. The MATTER in our observable universe might have been recycled with a singularity, but the CONTAINER that the matter is in seems to have always been there. If you hold a firecracker in your hand and there is an explosion then it doesn't mean that the data you recorded for your blown apart hand is conflated with anything outside of your hand, especially if it's not visible to you. I think the universe IS infinitely old, and yes something can't come from nothing, which is why I believe the UNobservable and observable universe is infinitely old. Just because we can't wrap our minds around infinity, and can't really understand it, doesn't mean there is a God or outside force that created the ENTIRE INFINITE universe.

Son of a preacher ?. that says it all. The poor kid has been indoctrinated from birth.

This kid really needs to call Athiest Experience some Sunday morning and let them teach him what’s what. I’d want to hear Matt and Jen talk with him. Anyone have a better pair of hosts in mind?

Pretty lame for a "genius". Not a tiny thread of evidence. Same old same old. BULLSHIT!

I didn't believe in Bigfoot until I thought about him logically.

Just think, he is already in league with Stephen Hawking as all his arguments are also just theory.
THis kid is still way ahead of Hawking.