[Dimensio]

I believe one can look at a set of facts about the universe and reasonably conclude it was created.

If this is the case then it shouldn't be terribly difficult for the observations to be documented, tests to be constructed and a falsification criteria to be constructed. What, exactly, would falsify the notion of a "created" universe? Moreover, what does the creation of the universe have to do with biological evolution?

[PatrickHenry]

What, exactly, would falsify the notion of a "created" universe?

Nothing, really, which is why it's not a scientific notion. On the other hand, if a natural process can be described which accounts for the allegedly created item, the question then becomes why, given that a natural explanation exists, would it be flat-out rejected in favor of a supernatural "explanation"? In other words, why reject that which is comprehensible, in favor of that which, by definition, is incomprehensible?