Conclusion

Just like the BBT, the IUTs fail to explain some crucial stuff about the creation process. For example:
1. Where does the universe come from? Of course a super hot, extremely dense atom starts to expand and cool forming the galaxies, stars and planets. But where does the atom come from?
2. What drives the formation of the universe from nothing? For once I would forgive Sir Alfred Hoyle for thinking that the BBT is ridiculous. Imagining a Big Bang with only the scientific laws and mathematical equations without external forces is farfetched. And am not talking about the kind of forces in quantum mechanics or general relativity. Even Stephen shows of his feelings of an incomplete theory from his quote in A Brief History of Time: "… What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe?"
3. What is the purpose behind the formation of the universe? Why could this perfect design come into existence?
As we race through time to find the beginning of time basing our arguments on only what we see, these are things that we cannot just ignore. Though the whole BBT thing is explored to its limits, it leaves us curious as before. It gives us a good picture of how the universe came to being but it's not complete.

So here we are still on the little blue cute planet, in a wonderful universe looking for the answers of the beginning of time with the fundamental questions still unanswered. Maybe we should continue searching for the answers; maybe we should just let the Holy Book guide us. Or maybe we do not have enough space and time to consider either of these options. Or do we? Maybe in another universe we do? :)