"Unpredictable" does not mean "uncaused."
Actually in quantum mechanics that is not true. YOU must be of the belief that every event happened as the result of a prior cause. To believe that anything unpredictable must imply a deterministic outcome is simply wrong. Quantum mechanics and, specifically, Quantum Entanglement, shows this is NOT the case. For example, the belief that A causes B implies that A happened before B. Yet experimentation has shown that A may cause B not prior to but simultaneous to B and, therefore A is not a cause of B. Yet, if we look at what caused A that may also be a simultaneous event. Let's call that AB-. Let's look at the real world Stop the whole universe so that you see it, as it is, at the time it was stopped, like a photograph but in all its 3 dimensions but not in its 4th dimension, time. Scientists researching the progression of time know that the state of the universe in that 3d photograph can be altered without the necessity of time. Example Entanglement allows a particle 10cm from us to be rotated and at that precise moment a particle 500 million miles away is simultaneously rotated. The idea that time plays a part in the history of time is outdated. Events can happen simultaneously that defy known laws of physics. Here's a real life example scientists created a machine that allowed a beam of light to shine between two points but then rotated particles in that beam which rotated particles outside that beam beyond their machine. The result: a partial beam of light that stopped, a gap appeared in the beam but continued after the gap. On the other side of the room, the part of the beam where a gap now occurred appeared out of thin air simultaneously. Simultaneous implies event not cause

These are tested. Including observations from the WMAP satellite.

Not sure if this is right. From Wikipedia:

An experimental program is underway to further test inflation with more precise CMB measurements. In particular, high precision measurements of the so-called "B-modes" of the polarization of the background radiation could provide evidence of the gravitational radiation produced by inflation, and could also show whether the energy scale of inflation predicted by the simplest models (1015–1016 GeV) is correct. In March 2014, the BICEP2 team announced B-mode CMB polarization confirming inflation had been demonstrated. The team announced the tensor-to-scalar power ratio r was between 0.15 and 0.27 (rejecting the null hypothesis; r is expected to be 0 in the absence of inflation). However, on 19 June 2014, lowered confidence in confirming the findings was reported; on 19 September 2014, a further reduction in confidence was reported and, on 30 January 2015, even less confidence yet was reported. By 2018, additional data suggested, with 95% confidence, that r is 0.06 or lower: consistent with the null hypothesis, but still also consistent with many remaining models of inflation.

1. We don't have a quantum theory of gravity. So even if the Big Bang theory is correct, no one knows what happened nanoseconds of the BBT.

2. Even in the classical theory of gravity, we don't have the complete theory as we cannot explain the observed galactic stellar motion. Two theories are vying for that: MOND and Dark Matter - neither fulfill the bill completely.

3. There are other cosmological theories less known, such as Penrose's conformal cyclic cosmology, which have no beginning.

To claim that the universe has a beginning is speculative at the present moment.

Sigh. Jeffrey just fails to understand Aquinas.

https://youtu.be/umqtexaA93I&t=2m25s

Now that is funny!

So just a snarky response?

Good grief! A Christian being intellectually dishonest? Say it isn't so! https://media3.giphy.com/media/ECtLJKdGj8jfy/giphy.gif