I'm assuming that the origin of the universe is still a mystery.
This assumes the origin of the universe is important. The scientific answer to the origin of the universe is "Unknown - not enough data present to form a hypothesis."
To speak of quantum fluctuations, for instance, is little more than handwaving
And that's bullshit, right there. It's not handwaving. It's -A- hypothesis that fits the evidence as we know it.
That mystery, I think, opens the door to the God question
No, it really doesn't. It opens the door to "We need more data."
Why doesn't sasquatch enjoy the same status, that of an open question?
There is no positive evidence the sasquatch exists, while there is plenty of evidence to the contrary. Cryptozoologists and other pseudo-scientific nonsense not withstanding.
no subject
This assumes the origin of the universe is important. The scientific answer to the origin of the universe is "Unknown - not enough data present to form a hypothesis."
To speak of quantum fluctuations, for instance, is little more than handwaving
And that's bullshit, right there. It's not handwaving. It's -A- hypothesis that fits the evidence as we know it.
That mystery, I think, opens the door to the God question
No, it really doesn't. It opens the door to "We need more data."
Why doesn't sasquatch enjoy the same status, that of an open question?
There is no positive evidence the sasquatch exists, while there is plenty of evidence to the contrary. Cryptozoologists and other pseudo-scientific nonsense not withstanding.