First you want me to make a new thread, presumably so you would respond. Now you tell me that you won't answer me because "it's clear I'm not listening." That seems logically inconsistent with the previous statement. Seems like another dodge from this angle. Show me I'm wrong. Show me you aren't dodging. Answer me.
You want a deity to be an acceptable interpretation for the given evidence, but cannot define nor provide separate evidence for said deity. Explain to me why your deity hypothesis should be given the time of day.
“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.”