This guy is a real glutton for punishment apparently.
1. Your very first claim "Nobody makes things happen therefore they happen for no reason or purpose" implies that there must be reason or purpose to existence. There doesn't. Your second claim "Events cannot just occur on their own" is demonstrably false. Events occur all the time with no purpose. Purpose isn't necessary and never was. You desire there to be a purpose, because then you think your life will have meaning. The fact that you are too weak willed to find meaning in your life without the Universe having some magic divine "purpose" for you does not imply that basic fundamental aspects of chemistry and physics are wrong just because you desire them to be. Further, most events you are claiming occur with no purpose, actually do have a purpose: Returning a system to equilibrium. Ice melts to liquid water because.....heat from the surrounding environment flows into the ice, attempting to equilibrate the temperature between the environment, and the water. This is a purpose...without design...without a creator....without an intent outside of the immediate need to equilibrate.
2. You claim that....people who believe in evolution are holding back the entire human race. You are a crazy person who believes the "entire human race" is being secretly run by Satan in the form of an ice bound dragon through the Illuminati and the Carnegie foundation. Which is more likely to hold back humanity, a belief in descent through gradual modification, or believing that the world was supposed to end in 2012? In fact why are you worried about people "holding back the human race" at all, when clearly, the only people doing so are the Reptile Time Lords, and beyond that, what is there to hold back? We're all supposed to die in the world ending catastrophe, right? So why are you contradicting yourself here? Couldn't be because you don't actually believe the shit you're spewing, right?
3. You imply that inherent properties must be given. This illustrates that you don't comprehend what the term "inherent" means. So let me help you:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inherent
: involved in the constitution or essential character of something : belonging by nature or habit : intrinsic <risks inherent in the venture>
See that? Inherent: Involved in the constitution or ESSENTIAL CHARACTER of something. Belonging by NATURE or HABIT. The very definition of the word "inherent" excludes the capacity for "placed there by someone else".
4. You then employ a rhetorical fallacy, and a loaded question fallacy, when you ask the circular question of "How can something have properties if someone didn't designate them". The premise and conclusion are the same. They also ignore the simple fact that we've already discussed, that being that INHERENT PROPERTIES are not properties which are GIVEN, they are properties which are ESSENTIAL to the character of the object in question. So yeah.
5. Everything after the previous point is you just illustrating you've never had a basic chemistry or physics class. Its really super pathetic.