My wife is very empathetic and has had a difficult time buying the idea that there could be so much evil and the media is protecting/perpetuating the evil.
Then we got Covid (confirmed positive tests, yes). And we took ivermectin. It helped me get mostly better after only 10 hours of being real sick. Similar experience to Joe Rogan. For her she took it, was getting better, then secretly stopped taking it because she didn’t fully buy what I had told her about it. Then she got worse and worse while I got better. Two days later she said she’d take it again… and within an hour her symptoms went down. This morning (18 hrs later) she seems to be almost over it all.
I showed her that great doc on the history of ivermectin and she’s now finally taken the red pill because she experienced how this drug really does work and if people are suppressing it then… well… evil… and she’s now pissed about it… first major red pill.
Bro, scientists really don't have a clue. That's why theoretical physics is an entire field of study. Because literally the top scientists at the forefront of research literally actually do not have a clue as to how the universe works the way that it does within the boundaries of our system of physics, nor any capability of performing experiments outside of the bounds of our own physics, and as such, can only theorize.
Like I said, the appeal to science doesn't work when not even the scientists and mathemagicians can perform physical experiments to get the information that they need.
BUT eeeeeeeeven then. EVEN if you're lucky enough to explain how the sandbox got there and how it works, you still won't be able to explain why the sandbox is the specific mess that it is without introducing the idea of another party.
So, basically, it boils down to three things if you want to go all the way down the rabbit hole. When it comes to existence, things have either always existed, are created by another to exist, or they simply never exist.
The first gets handwaved fairly easily with simulation theory/God, i.e. higher ordered systems simply operate differently than we do. The second being that nothing is obviously is just nothing, which we don't have to worry about.
The idea that things have always existed is a fairly complicated one though it's not an impossibility, but it still leads you on to another question, which is why do things even have the properties that they have, then? How did the property of Gravity come to be, or rather, how did it come to be that individual gravitons are able to interact the way that they do if you believe in THAT theory.
TLDR, though I do recommend you read, science is an ever digging hole where each question just leads to another "Why?".
Religion and theoretical physics are both attempts to plug that hole with "Shit's the way that it is because of X" but even they still BOTH have yet another unanswered question, which is "Well I understand that shit's the way that it is because of X, but why is X THAT? I.e. WHY is X the way that it is? I.e. WHY do X be the way that it do?"
Which is why Philosophy is ultimately the true Gentleman's endeavor. Why is God the way that he is? Why is the universe the way that it is? Why are we the way that we are? What is it, even, to be? Incidentally, it is also a field of study with IQs on par/above the sciences.
TLDR #2: WHY do things be the way that they do? Why do THIS be the way that it do? What about that? Science will only take you so far until you start flirting with theoretical physics and then at that point you're basically just wishing you were making out with the much hotter Philosophy 101 and asking way more fun questions. 🤷♂️
Even if scientists don't have a clue, even if we don't understand every little detail of how precisely the universe works, that's not evidence for god. And that's my whole point. There is no compelling, falsifiable evidence for god. In science it's ok to say "we don't know".
Again, science won't ever prove how the universe came to be either.
Using science - which relies on its OWN theories which are literally just theories and literally no more or less valid than the theory that this system was created by a creator, and does not even circumstantially in its search for truth DISPROVE the theory of a creator of this system - as your specific reason to not believe in God, is simply illogical.
That is MY point.
A scientific theory is vastly different from the colloquially used word "theory".
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/scientific-theory
So no, the guess or idea of a creator is not just as valid as the scientific theory of the big bang, or evolution.
It's not the responsibility of science nor anyone else to disprove god, but rather the responsibility of the one claiming god exists to prove god exists. And just because science can't currently explain everything in the universe does not mean god did it; that's god of the gaps fallacy.