Yeah, I just looked over this again and was about to correct myself. Still, I have major issues with the premises.
If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.
Why is this the case? Pretend for a minute that I don't believe in gods. Please describe for me why it is *necessary* for "objective morality" to not exist if there aren't any gods?
2. Objective moral values do exist.
What would the converse look like? What does "objective moral values" even mean? Do you mean "don't kill people", because a. that is highly subjective and subverted by Christians for a variety of subjective reasons all the time, and b. doesn't require the existence of gods to agree in? Do you mean "when you drop a ball from the side of a building it will fall until it hits the ground"? Because that doesn't seem terribly "moral" to me, is technically subverted by quantum-level physics, and at that is only really true on the planet we live on.
3. Therefore, God exists.
Well, congratulations. It's easy to make a non-fallacious argument when you base a conclusion on two false premises. After all, the only time an argument is ever fallacious is if it's possible for a premise to be true but the conclusion false. In this case, both the premises are "not even false", if you know what I mean.
1. If there were no William Lane Craig, UFOs would be fake.
2. UFOs are real.
Therefore, there is William Lane Craig.