Ok, but what if there is some case or model that scientists haven't considered?

Of course we will continue to develop newer scientific models, and we should be open to it.

But as evidence-based thinkers, we do need to work with the knowledge that we have, and not rely too heavily on a future discovery that hasn't happened yet. And if work with what we know, we do need to at least consider the God hypothesis as a reasonable alternative.

Perhaps the core of this question is coming from a different objection, though. It might be coming from the idea that God is just a convenient plug - to plug up the gaps in our scientific knowledge, and so we just need to wait for science to eventually solve this problem.

But that is a different topic, so if you're interested, you can follow this link to the whole issue of God of the Gaps: Isn’t God just a god of the gaps to fill what science hasn’t figured out yet?