Well, when your science explains where the 5/6ths of the missing matter in the universe is, or where the "dark energy" is, I'm all ears.

Also, you can try to explain how individual proteins arrange themselves into bilaterally symmetrical, organ-infused organisms of astounding complexity, using only protein recipes.

I know you can't explain it, but that doesn't mean you won't try.

There is the known, the unknown, and the unknowable. For many, entire branches of the unknown are unknowable because they refuse to expand their criteria for how they evaluate the facts. Sherlock Holmes' father had a quote to the effect about once you have eliminated the possible, all that's left is the impossible (bad paraphrase, I know).

That’s beyond bad paraphrasing - that's the polar opposite of the original.

When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

> Also, you can try to explain how individual proteins arrange themselves into bilaterally symmetrical, organ-infused organisms of astounding complexity, using only protein recipes.

The problem is that you’re conflating “I don’t understand it” with “it must be magic”

A hallmark of charlatans and pseudoscience pushers has been to find something they can claim is the boundary of scientific knowledge (often incorrectly) and then assert that everything past that line therefore is magic.

It’s a tale as old as time. Yet every time we make new discoveries they just move the line a little further and claim the magic must be over there now.

Another classic move is to make extraordinary assertions (magical hidden forces) but then when anyone objects they try to push the burden of proving the opposite on to the other person. That’s something you’re doing throughout this thread perhaps with realizing how irrational it all is.