Atheism, evolution and blah III

Round three *ding*

So, I found another incredibly interesting and incredibly false argument: The Uncaused Causer.
The argument goes something like this: The universe has not always existed. Something cannot be created by nothing, so something must have always existed. That something must be immensely powerful because there is an immense amount of matter and energy and it must be immensely intelligent, as it created everything in this oh so complex a world, and that effectively means God. Here are some flaws in that reasoning.
a)Before does not have a meaning when it comes to the universe, therefore the universe has "always" existed by sheer definition because time began when the universe began. There is no before.
b) Why must their be intelligence? I've discussed this before, the world is utterly complex but derives from simplicity.
c) God can not have "always" existed by the same reasoning that the universe "can't" "always" have existed. (Notice the drastic increase of inverted commas?^^)

Next is a very amusing argument for God by a semi-famed philosopher whose name I forget and am to lazy to look up, that had me stumped for quite a while until the absurdity of it hit me. It goes like this:
I) God is a being which possesses every good attribute.
II) It is better to exist than not to exist.
III) Therefore, existence is a good attribute.
IV)Therefore, God possesses the attribute existence.
V) Therefore, God exists by definition.

Well, there is one little problem, just because I define that a shwimp is a blue flying pig that exists doesn't mean it does, does it?

And one last thing, about which I'd like to vent my anger. A certain person(yes, I mean you Frank Walton) has linked in my blog to his. Now, this in itself isn't so bad. But, he only allows moderated comments and, since his blog does not have a comment I could find contradicting his opinion(admittedly I have neither will nor time to read his entire blog), even though his message is very controversial, so it just reeks like censorship, and so I shall not even try. So Frank Walton, I'd be happy to engage in a (sort-of^^) grown-up discussion, if you are capable, if you read my blog(and don't just google Brian Sapient and call him an idiot at every oportunity, which I am almost sure of anyhow) and if you feel like you are not demeaning yourself by discussing such a thing who has no qualifications beyond over-average intelligence.
Thank you.

PS: I find linking in other people's comments very rude if you do not at least mention that person's blog in your own.

Edit: I just found rules regarding the comments, so I guess I'll give it a try. Wish me luck.