Nope. Wrong again. The universe was dominated by light in the first instants, and matter was formed from the light (look up pair production). Matter is, therefore, an accident of light.
Dark energy has some measured properties (gravitational pressure, energy density, non-interaction with the electric field, approx uniform density as the universe expanded, etc.), just not enough yet to fully describe it's behaviour.
I find your 'proven fact' comments so funny. Keep them coming! :chuckle:
The BB suggests a beginning, but in a restricted sense. If I say that a tv programme has a beginning, I imply that there was a time before then when the programme wasn't showing, because the tv show's beginning was described relative to other events and time existed before, during and after the show.
For the universe, time is an internal property of events within the universe itself. You cannot describe times within the universe in relation to events external to it. If by beginning you mean there was a time when the universe did not exist, then you are making a fundamental mistake about the nature of time. Time cannot extend into the past beyond the BB singularity.
Since there was NO time before the BB in which to embed the BB event, I see no need for a creation event. The BB expansion was internal to the universe and marks the start of time as we can describe it. The universe's 4D space time extent just exists, as a bounded whole. no start, no finish, as measured externally. just existence.
Then you have not been reading my posts. I have been quite clear that using the necessary lack of knowledge of things external to the universe to demonstrate the existence of a creator is to invoke the discredited 'God of the gaps' argument.
Don't be afraid of not knowing all the answers. It is better to honestly not know than to pretend you know something for which the evidence is so weak. Believe it if you want, but don't pretend the evidence and logic is secure.