I read this a few times and it seems as though the writer is trying to do everything he possibly can to counteract such key arguments against evolution or chance existence by going round in circles and emphasising on points that are truly meaningless and irrelevant.

Everything he discusses yet again is 'theory'....just like the evolution 'theory' and the Big Bang 'theory'. None of these will ever be able to be classified as FACT that's why the scientific world will have to add the word theory to it.

Regardless there are many questions that completely go against this atheistic approach to the origin of the universe.

First of all....no matter how much he go's in circles, every atheist scientist hates the question/ point that they are often faced with when it comes to the simple fact that 'from nothing you get nothing'. It doesn't matter how or what any scientist tries he will never be able to counteract that. Even a child would know that if you have nothing you only get nothing out of it...NOT EVERYTHING....especially if there is no cause....

Seriously think about that...in the most logical way possible.... Can you get EVERYTHING from NOTHING.?...the question itself is absolutely ridiculous...

You must remember that that Big Bang itself didn't occur in 'space'...at a certain 'time'...involving 'matter'....but actually created all those factors with its occurrence...so think about that...before the Big Bang there was no time, space and matter.....there was NOTHING....