You couldn’t possibly be spending any great time in your answers to me. There’s nothing there you couldn’t get out of Uncle Joe’s Whizbag of snappy talking points
”So why don't you just sit quietly . . .”
More smoke (subject changing). You would like me to go away (“sit quietly” . . . Ha!). You’ve already embarrassed yourself by demonstrating your ignorance of the answer to the most basic theistic question scientists are asked, and your lack of awareness of the chasm existing between what many distinguished scientists say (see #1612 - when a scientist is asked a scientific question about God, since he is equipped (by choice) with nothing but a materialistic methodology, as a scientist he must necessarily answer, “I don’t know.") and what they actually practice.
If you want to be treated seriously, you’re going to have to do something besides blow smoke and whine. Quit your dancing or end this discussion.
I take it that you consider your words here to be an argument? Sorry, but I don't consider that you've said anything at all. Seems to me, all you do is insult -- and then complain about being insulted!
I'll say again, the proper scientific answer to a question about God is, "I don't know, because that's not a scientific question."
Of course, any scientist is entitled to his or her personal opinions, but if they claim their personal opinions are a "scientific finding," worthy of a scientific "theory of God," then the same rules would apply as to anti-evolutionism: where is your research published in what peer-reviewed scientific journal? And if the answer is, "no where," as it surely is, then we may reasonably conclude the scientist is just trying to puff up his personal opinions.