you say God doesnt exist. you have no proof, therefore, are you not as "wrong" as i to even attempt to explain it? in which case, are you not diverging from your coveted ideals?
"May" != "will"
Valid explanations are those supported by evidence and observations, not those that are brought forth simply because you can't think of an explanation.
i use "may" for a specific reason. "will" is not always true. there are clouds and they are very heavy with solids. it is highly likely to rain ("may rain") but then again, it could blow over.
scientists found fossiles that look like what they predicted. they "may" be right on the prediction, or the prediction simply correlates to another phenomia not theorized yet.
evolution "might" be proved by fossils, God "might" be proven by simply waking up and realizing you are alive for a reason. then again, they might not. though the chances are so slim they arent statistically relevant, you must account for them when drawing a conclusion on a rule.
in other words "will" is a no-no word in science.