An argument for evolution and an argument for supernatural beings

Consider:

1. Many instances of F have explanations fitting an evolutionary explanatory schema.
2. There are no instances of F that we have good reason to think lacking an explanation fitting an evolutionary explanatory schema.
3. So, probably, all instances of F have an explanation fitting an evolutionary explanatory schema.

For instance, F can be biological diversity or non-initial biological complexity. Now compare:

4. Many instances of G have explanations fitting an agential explanatory schema.
5. There are no instances of G that we have good reason to think lacking in an explanation fitting an agential explanatory schema.
6. So, probably, all instances of G have an explanation fitting an agential explanatory schema.

For instance, G can be orderly complexity or usefulness or value. But there are instances of orderly complexity, usefulness and value with the property that if they have an agential explanation, they have an agential explanation involving supernatural beings. The orderly complexity, usefulness and value in the laws of nature is like that, for instance.

I am not inclined to think either of the arguments above very strong, however.