If Dark Matter and Dark Energy are just convenient titles with no real definition or understanding then I am certainly entitled to give them my name...God's Living Waters...
You're entitled to call anything you'd like whatever you choose, but giving it a name doesn't explain it, that requires a mechanistic description.
...a property listed in Isaiah which Almighty God says is His Mighty Power...
To be clear, a 'property' ascribed to a purported deity by someone in a collection of works which include a number of demonstrably false statements and countless unsubstantiated (and probably unsubstantiable) claims.
His Dynamic Energy...when He says...look into the heavens, who made these things with the superabundance of His Mighty Power/Dynamic Energy, not one is missing.
And the Hindus put this 'creation' down to another deity, and each of the Native American tribal traditions have their own supernatural claim, and the ancient Egyptians had Geb and Nut... your chose story is just one amongst hundreds with no more nor less evidentiary basis - which is to say, none.
If we can build stars from this material/energy then we can certainly build all science from it because all science is a manifestation of all the stars and gravity also fits into the equation when you read the Biblical clues properly.
You can't build 'science', science is a method not an object. You can, indeed, explain all the other parts of the physical universe from the same rules and raw materials that you can use to explain the origin of stars, because stars are another manifestation of the physical universe - this says nothing as to your assertions of an extra-universal director of affairs.
Now...everything I say is scientifically suggested by the known scientific behaviour of God's Living Waters...plus a few personal truths as well.
No, everything you say is asserted by a collection of bronze-age fairy tales, paralleled by equally unevidenced claims from numerous other traditions around the globe. There is no 'science' in your assertions - no hypothesis, no description of the means of falsification or validation, no demonstration of the data supporting or refuting the claim... you misuse the term science to try to co-opt the hard-won authority of centuries of painstaking, rigorous, detailed, peer-reviewed work for your belief system's assertions.
O.
