Right. Which is why it is not an adequate answer to a "how" question. Even if you accept that the "who" was god, the appropriate response to "how" is not "god did it" but rather "I don't know."
When we convene, refuting materialistic explanations is sufficient. Physical science is not the appropriate field and the how remains beyond its grasp.
geologist: Blood clotting is caused by earthquakes
Micro biologist- No it isn't (earthquake theory refuted)
g- So you think you can just refute my theory? Where's the evidence that your enzymes cause blood clotting. Provide geological evidence.
mb- using your eyes you can see that the process conforms to the enzymatic actions.
g- So thats it?
mb-- thats all that can be given
g- So enzymes did it
mb- yes
g- that's not a seismographic explanation
mb- no it isn't
g- this will not get published in a geography journal
mb- no it wont
g- [something about geography doesnt deal with enzymes, gnomes, fairies and other imaginary beings]
mb- they aren't needed, see the perceptible portion of the blood clotting phenomenon explained in Enzymatic Design.
g- fairies did it. Faries are causing the blood clots
mb- you could call them that if you want.
g- All hail the flying spaghetti monster, king of blood clotting
mb- different name, it doesnt matter. Again see Enzymatic Design
g- no
mb- fine
g- new evidence that earthquakes cause blood clotting
mb- this was refuted.