Creator and creation; two sides of the same coin?

it can also just look like an inkblot.

I think Aristotle tried that line of reasoning. One problem with his premises was that he assumed "time" to be infinite which "big bang" theory negates.

That old statement we learned in school; that the sum of energy in the universe is constant... If that still holds true it makes it hard for me to see how the big band brought more of it, or how it could ever disappear... Makes more sense to me to think of the big bang as a turning point in a cycle rather than an absolute beginning.

I am on a computer which has no backspace button and no questionmark. If it had I would have used them

The "zero sum" aspect of "the universe" is handled by postulating negative entities to balance positive ones (hence "anti-matter" etc) It might be interesting to speculate on " a creator" being balanced by " an anti-creator" (Satan perhaps !)

The big mistake is giving human purpose to the universe, in the absense of any evidence that it is so.

Yes, that is what this thread is about.

I mean, if we are what we are today as a result of a development that eventually led to this outcome, even if it was a pure result of chance and chaos, then wouldn't we, looking back at this development see a sting of events that gradually opened up the possibility of our existence?

I can understand how a person who puts too much importance on human existence would mistake this as evidence of a purpose that we are the fullfillment of.

The way I see it, this planet wasn't changed into something that can support life so that life could come into existence. That's rather backwards.
Instead, I think that when this planet altered into a place where life could be sustained, a possibility opened; the possibility of life. And then it happened, just because it could. And just because the oportunity was present, it evolved until it was what it is today. Looking back at that, and not thinking in terms of oportunity, but in terms of purpose, I can understand how it may seem that our coming into existence was part of a great scheme. I can see how some may believe that, but I don't believe it myself.

Anthropomorphizing..

Religions are good at that..

I tend to think of the universe as an overly large compost pile with spontaneous combustion as a result of primordial soup contaminated by microbial organisms. But then, I'm an optimist.

And the soup is no good, he?

tepid gazpacho.

That leaves me cold...

frigid?

Never!

Gazpacho must be cold.

at dinner last night I was served Vino Verde, it was room temperature. Not only that, the gamberi scampi was served with red sauce pasta. the minestrone was pretty good though.

Vino Verde at room temperature? Only in America..

However, I praise your culinary choices.

(Sorry guys, for the side tracking...)

Unfortunately for us atheists, this is a tautology. Both "evidence" and "mistakes" lie in the eye of the beholder. It might be better to fall back to Occam's Razor which eliminates the need to postuate "a creator" as an extraneous axiom in "nature", which appears to operate as a non-linear system giving rise to spontaneous transient complex structures. (Reference here to Prigogine's work in chemical dynamics).