Just put something that makes sense beside something else that doesn’t make sense and walk away before they start noticing that something is missing.

It is time we stopped accurately describing a problem and then proposing a solution that doesn’t make sense right afterwards. If life is too improbable to occur on earth on its own, ascribing its creation or design to an unknown all-knowing and all-mighty entity that no one has ever met before doesn’t help anyone or explain anything. It, in and of itself, requires a greater deal of explanation than what they are attempting to explain by proposing it.

If you’re going to say it is unlikely to occur on its own, so is God.

Why would it be easier for God to come to existence on his own, without needing to be created, or to just be existing since ever, without having a starting point of existence before which he never existed, but that very same attribute of eternal existence or being able to come to existence on their own is impossible to be true for or to be the case with matter, energy, or anything else whatsoever?

The problem is that you can arrive to any of these conclusions on your own at any point in human history, without necessarily needing science to suggest anything that could propel you in that direction. We didn’t think about any of those conclusions because of too much science. We arrived at such conclusions because we started thinking. None of the above conclusions needs any confirmation from science. They only need rationality, reason, and intelligence.