Thank you!

Fact: British researchers have scientifically concluded that the chicken came first.

Theory: Evolutionary researchers have proposed proto-chickens. The first chicken came from the egg of a non-chicken. (Possibly... God didn't create Basset Hounds to kick things off either, but this merely punts the can down the road. Where did all of this original genetic information come from?)

Alternate Theory: The first chicken came from across the road.

Alien Theory: The first chicken came from across the galaxy.

Thank you for your time. Sorry about the adversarial tone, but this is a challenge. It's about urging you to be that rogue buffalo, to do your homework and not just accept the default. If you die and your soul persists, or if aliens appear, or if God is real and suddenly shows up and tells everyone to get out of the pool, you will at least have the comfort of knowing you did the research and thoughtfully made the most logical decision. That's potentially very important, because if one or more of the alternate theories prove correct, you just might have all of eternity to think about it.

The key to making a cogent decision here is in realizing that our origins cannot currently be scientifically verified. No matter which conclusion you reached, a leap of faith was necessary to arrive there. I think we owe it to ourselves to ensure that the jump is rationally based. 

As all the explanations involve a degree of faith, arbitrarily removing God from the option list is like intentionally ignoring the elephant, and then trying to explain the large mass of fecal matter in the room by postulating an on-going, highly-localized accumulation of mouse droppings.

We could create an elegant theory involving the mice. (In fact, we could probably qualify for major funding because we've agreed not to consider the elephant.) However, if we do not preclude the elephant in the room, we are enabled to find the most rational explanation and respond effectively. (A clown and a shovel, as opposed to mousetraps.)

Science should always have the intellectual freedom to follow the evidence, wherever it leads. As should we.