Why not?

You claim that a few theories are "pretty possible" based on no evidence whatsoever, then rule out the most clever and logical one, a god.

All observed phenomena follow the principle of cause and effect. Nothing happens but that something preceeding it caused it to happen. If you are aware of anything to refute that basic axiom then please bring it to light.

.. So basically, everything must come from something

Scientists say that ~13.7bn years ago the Big Bang occurred and blah blah blah, but I've been thinking and this makes no sense to me. There must've been some catalyst to cause the Big Bang and it must've came from somewhere, and so on and so forth. So basically, everything must come from something, so does this mean the universe has an infinite age? This is impossible, yet any other possibilities I can think of are implausible.

I'm mindfucked. Can anyone explain this to me?

That's not so cut-and-dry in the world of quantum mechanics. There's, to our current understanding, no cause that says that a given unstable atom must decay right now and not a second ago. There's probabilities distributions, but no actual dice.

You're typing words here, that don't mean what you think they mean (powerful, indipendent of time and space, material, beginning, cause, outside the universe). And basically mean very little or are not precise enough for them to be useful in a debate about physics. But that's the whole point of religion, isn't it? It doesn't have to make very sense when you get down to the details, it just has to look good from afar and ring nice enough in our ears. It has to please.

I'm all for the arts, I just don't think that a nice impressionist painting of the river tells me more about how it truly is than most crappy photographs of crude schematics of its currents. It's something made up to make us feel on the inside, not to make us know the outside.

Let me cut to the point: you're proposing the god of gaps, that is getting smaller and smaller with our ignorance. But right now and in the foreseeable future we might not know much about the incredibly different and remote conditions near what we call the Big bang.

And yet, silly as that caged god might sound, it satisfies you. That's your call: you are free to see bogeymen in the shadows and fairies drawing rainbows as well.

For most logical people, though, an omnipotent being with volition and feelings and thought and moral that encompasses all conceivable universes and able to know the evolution of all that can come to be at all time is simply an infantile cop out. The laws of physics might sound more complicated to us - or at least to many of us - whereas saying somebody did it sounds simpler. But again, that's infantile thinking: that's relying on words ( person is a single word that implies incredible amounts of complexity ) instead of the underlying concepts.

In reality, where by reality I mean within the accepted bounduaries of logic, God is a more complex and ad-hoc explanation that multiverses, endlessly variating laws of physics, endlessly cycling universes. You're just sweeping the dirty complexity under the god-labeled rug and claiming the room of cosmology is now cleaner. It isn't.

This is not supposed to be about vague words, it's supposed to be about the numbers, precisely defined concepts, fasification. And math and physics taught us that there are concepts out there, from infinitesimal calculus to non euclidian geometries to imaginary numbers that sound weird and far from what we are trained and evolved to define (person), but in the end explain and reflect the world in elegant and wonderous ways. Zeno's paradox? that's just words. Trouble with infinite recession of causes? that's just words.

We're past that, or we should be.

.. There is no information on the events prior to the big bang in the big bang theory.

That does not preclude there being a cause. The fact that the universe runs on probability distributions for certain events is still part of the chain of causation.

That's not so cut-and-dry in the world of quantum mechanics. There's, to our current understanding, no cause that says that a given unstable atom must decay right now and not a second ago. There's probabilities distributions, but no actual dice.