<i>&gt; If the universe was not created, why can we predict it with such accuracy?</i><p>Scientifically, there is nothing to suggest these two are related in any way.<p>I could ask &quot;if cows weren&#x27;t orange then why do Oreos have white filling?&quot; it would have the same amount of meaning. To stay with my example, I posit the only reason you think cows are orange and therefore Oreos have a white filling is because someone told you so. To an unbriefed outsider, these statements are wrong and factually disconnected.<p><i>&gt; Wouldn&#x27;t it just be random?</i><p>There are lots of places where randomness exists in the universe, but more importantly what we&#x27;re talking about in regard to emergent phenomena is <i>chaos</i>, not randomness. It&#x27;s the interaction of many unpredictable little factors, and that does <i>not necessarily</i> lead to meaningless entropy.<p><i>&gt; To me, the fact that science even works is evidence for creation.</i><p>Again, this makes sense because you have been taught that. For someone who is not familiar with these teachings this sentence may not be parseable. By the way, I apologise if this sounds insensitive, I don&#x27;t mean to be disparaging here. I merely want to invite you to see this from the perspective of someone with a different cultural background where the symbols that are essential to <i>your</i> everyday life may not exist or even be understood.