Ok I admit it

[fr0d0]

There is no point in providing an explanation for which there is no evidence. I dismiss the idea because you cannot provide any evidence to support it.

Let's take another scenario. You come home to find your car has been scratched. 2 of many possiblities are:

There is no point in proving something for which there is evidence, because the proof of it is self evident. We only need to prove what we don't know. Nor what we do know.

It depends what you call evidence. You've jumped the gun, in fact I think you swallowed the bullet already. All we have discussed so far is purpose being the reason to consider God. You can address the subject if you wish. Currently your playing in an extra terrestrial stadium.