Our universe existing exactly as it is--with stars, evolution, physics and we human beings our perception and intellect is so statistically improbable to occur in any single universe as to be considered impossible by our current measures of such things to exist here and now as we are.
Yet the fact that there are infinite probabilities and possible realities make it completely probable that we should be here--just as we are.
Hawking, Dawkins and many other scientists all believe there is an excellent chance that life exists elsewhere within our own universe and in our present time. Professor Hawking believes it so much that he states he feels it is inadvisable and risky to try to reach out to our neighbors as they may be exponentially more advanced than us. Some of his peers have gone on to state the dangers may be more than merely encountering lifeforms more technologically advanced than us but that we might encounter lifeforms more naturally advanced than us--beings who see and experience reality(s) in ways that are not only unfathomable to us but would be--in fact--not even possible for us.
All of these thoughts have been expressed by mainstream, secular thinking scientists--no theology required. Professor Dawkins has even allowed as a "thought experiment" that more advanced lifeforms could rationally be imagined to have created our universe and that their handiwork could be conceivably found if means were developed to recognize it.
All of these things are considered plausible by science.
Yet the concept that there may be a Creator completely different from life within our own universe influencing and interested in it and that It has left evidences and measures of It's existence that can be observed by sentient minds here is considered scientific anathema...even though our own existence is as statistically absurd and unlikely as the existence of such a creative being.
There is no less chance of a Creator existing as there is for humans to exist. There are no mathematics or scientific principles that limit the existence of intelligent life to only our dimension and space-time. There is no scientific argument to demand that a being must be material as we are, function as we do or "be like us" or be as limited as we are.
If in fact some experiences we call "religious" or "spiritual" or "supernatural" are evidences or veiled perceptions of "another" it may prove that we have been limited in our methods of looking for a "God". By relying on "science in this universe" and "only as we understand it" we may be making it actually impossible to ever see beyond where we are now.
Scientists have answered, "Well this is all we know--we have to stick with it." My response is, "Really?" I happen to believe individuals may very well "see" beyond what is simply on the paper in front of us and we just haven't recognized it fully. There are many others who feel this way as well--including some scientists.
I say, "I have had an experience" and if someone objects and says, "We can't test it" my suggestion is, "Then change your methods". If individual, internal perception has any validity, then we may already be floating in a sea of "evidence"--we just don't have the means to collectively process and quantify it all. If beyond this there are beings who can process and understand and manipulate these things we aren't currently able to do ourselves, why is it "impossible" in an infinite set of realities, that some may have reached our way and touched us?