Who throws the dice for you?

[Jackalope]

I don't have to accept 5. The alternative that I proposed is that there is a scientific explanation that we have yet to discover. As an illustration: God did not make the solar system work until Newton had an opportunity to ponder skydiving fruit.

The existence of such a scientific explanation would make either premise 1 or 2 or both premise 1 and 2 false. If you accept 1 and 2 as true it precludes you from saying there is scientific explanation that we have yet to discover.

I don't think this is the case at all. We understand that any "truth"(*) discovered by science is always provisional in nature, and always subject to revision by later discoveries.

(*) The whole notion of "truth" in this concept is a bit nebulous in the first place. "Truth" is in the wheelhouse of philosophers, not scientists.