In another thread, Jon the Catholic recommends us to watch this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQxfMjhytIc in which a Catholic apologist tries to demonstrate the existance of God.

I'll transcript just the first two reasons because it's too long (the other two are the fine-tunning argument and the moral absolute argument), in case anyone would want to give Jon the reasons he needs to see this does not prove anything at all.

(...) Science can't prove or disprove the existence of immaterial basic aspects of reality such as numbers, minds or morality (...) or God, a pure unlimited being that exists without deficiency and embodies all perfection and goodness.

1. The Universe exists (...). If something exists, and it doesn't have to exist, or could be different, then there must be a reason for why it exists. This is called the principle of sufficient sufficient reason and it's used in Science all the time. (...) but we haven't found it yet. If it's true for little things that don't have to exist like Higgs Bossom particle, then it must be true for anything that doesn't have to exist regardless of size, including the Universe itself. (...) Why is there a universe? The answer to the question can't be another contingent universe or even an infinite series of contingent things, because then we have the same problem to explain. Why does this infinite series of things that doesn't have to exist, exists? Instead there must be a reality that it's necessary or reality that exists by its very nature could not be different and could not fail to exist. That is the definition of God: pure existance or being itself, something that is pure unlimited being, which exists without limit or flaw and posses all perfection (...) including perfect intelect and will.

2. The Universe began to exist. Whenever something began to exist, we rightly reason that there's a cause for that thing existance. This is what we always observe and correspond to the intuition that out of nothing, nothing comes. Besides, evidence for God that would satisfy atheists, like a regrown limb or another miracle, asumes that those events could not occur naturally by something coming from nothing. So if the universe, or all the space matter and energy began to exist, then it would need a cause. Some might say maybe the cause it's an alien or another universe or a scientific explanation, but remember if I say all physical reality (space, time, matter, energy) began then it needs a cause. The cause of the universe can be material, because we are trying to explain the existance of material things.

There can never be in principle a scientific explanation for the beginning of the Universe -from nothing- because scientific explanations involved formulas, like E=mc2 and the stuff you plug into the formula, but if the Universe comes from absolutely nothing there would be neither theories nor any stuff to plug into the the theories to explain it, instead the cause of the Universe would exist beyond the spatial-temporal order.

I want to begin by saying (reading the first paragraph) that it seems that Trent Horn doesn't consider Maths, Neuroscience, Anthropology, Psychology or Sociology a part of Science.