Creationist model

Nice one Tesla, that is a lovely way to welcome a new member, accuse him of being too stupid to understand your argument. This is what you do when anyone has the temerity to disagree with you. Perhaps you might give thought to an alternative hypothesis, namely that people understand your argument perfectly well, and we understand it to be bollocks. You are no "master stonemason" my friend.
Your "laws of science" break down at step three. Providing some kind of evidence for this baseless and false assertion might make a good start for the promised creation model that, 184 posts in, you have shown no sign of providing.

---

Mutate and Survive

Tesla, All that this amounts to is the standard creationist argument from incredulity. It is an argument that gets regular airing here, sometimes from people who are able to express it in grammatically correct English. Essentially, it goes;
"WOW! The universe is just so darn AMAZING that I can't understand it, therefore God must have made it."
Alternatively, perhaps you just don't understand because you haven't done enough learning. My advice is learn more, rant less.

---

Mutate and Survive

Tesla,
If you think that order cannot exist without direction, how do you explain the flocking behaviour birds? Or the Giant's Causeway? Or any of the many other examples that have been provided already?
No matter how you choose to phrase it, an argument from incredulity will always remain a fallacy.

---

Mutate and Survive