Because of polarity and the nature of the universe everything IS cause and effect. Bad science results from mismatching cause and effect. For that matter, can there be bad science? In science, making mistakes is progress, as long as you realize, and sooner or later you will, the mistake.
I expect that most of you see my suggestion that we are all our own universe as corny but I see it applying here. The problem may be semantics, a common culprit in disagreements. exDem Mom sees the same phenomena the rest of us see but she ascribes to them different characteristics than we do. We see intelligence and design, an invisible hand, where she sees none. For me, it is hard to see the complexity of the interactions of the universe, both material and emotional, and attribute them to happenstance. We all agree that what is simply is but some of us ascribe value to certain parts of it and others don't.
I prefer the Christian view because it fills other needs for me than just a description of what is and how it came to be. If we care to pursue the scientific view we will usually end up back at the uncaused cause and will have gained nothing. Believers see a Divine Cause and relieve themselves of the mental stupor induced by contemplating Uncaused Cause.
Some disdain philosophy and simply accept what is and work with it from there. It is hard to know whether one's world view comes from knowledge gained or whether the knowledge gained is determined by one's world view. That is why I describe it as our own universes.
We end up as an example of the four blind men, each with access to only a part of an elephant, describing what they feel. To them their individual experiences are reality. To an outside observer it is obvious their knowledge is incomplete. A strictly scientific approach would examine the entire elephant and come up with a complete and detailed description of the animal. A poet would describe the elephant in a way that would place it emotionally in the human experience. Is one superior to the other or do we need both. God doesn't exclude science but scientists often try to exclude God, a fool's errand.
Everything, in my view, comes down to values. Values can't be dismissed outright as unimportant and unscientific because they guide our actions and our thinking. Many of our values, if not most, are instilled in us before we have developed critical thinking skills yet they guide our interests in and choices of fields of study and activity. Values can be and often are changed as we gain knowledge but our inclinations often persist. Our life's direction and progress are dependent upon our values.
God and No-God are each unprovable. We must settle for our opinions which are guided by our values.
No put that in a petri dish and examine it!
You are confusing action and reaction with cause and effect, there is no cause and effect.
God and No-God are each unprovable.
After you define your God I can disprove it.