Was It Designed?, page-1981

I'm getting sick of the bugs associated with HC, Reply function failed yet again.
@wafflehead,
First, I can't put you right because I don't even come close to having all the answers. We all have our set ideas. This is one of yours that you have repeated for years.
An example is a material universe that caused itself, grew from staggering exactitudes, limited itself, governed itself and then produced life so as to evolve a creature with the consciousness of the human who can manipulate the nature it emerged out of could not then have all the answers within itself. Something external to the universe and all therein contains the ultimate answers so we will never know definitively the answers to the big questions, but for the life of me and can not conceive how anybody can imagine that this all just falls together.

You dismiss the possibility of a '"material" universe "causing itself" but appear to be happy that a Creator/God which is more complex than the universe just exists.
This does not sound like an explanation to me but more like a case of kicking the can further down the street.

You write about anything conflicting with proven science needs to be rejected. It seems to me that you are talking about science that you agree with. In the past, you have rejected quantum physics, a proven science. I'm not sure why you did so.

I don't know how the universe how (or why) the universe started. Some call me a fence sitter for stating this.
That's fine. I just can't get myself around to pretending that I know when I don't.
I can't say whether or not you are right. All I'm doing is expressing the problems as I see them with your beliefs.

Even proven science is not set in concrete - it is a work in progress and shifts as more information comes to light and better understanding is realised.