It’s an invalid question. Not all science is experimental, quite a bit is purely observational. So demanding an experiment to prove observational science is a strawman argument, a deliberate fallacy, thus proving you actually the facts don’t back whatever position it is you’re taking, but you want to argue it anyway. Since you need fallacies we both know that what fight it is you’re trying to pick is one you’ll lose, so we might as well not even start. You’re wrong, you know it, I know, we’re done. Have a great day.
So much for an “intelligent conversation.” “Well it wasn’t magic” you say. It must have been magic because you believe in it but you don’t know how it happened. So much for intelligent thought.