[Olog-hai]

There “can be no answer”?? Sean Carroll is no longer a scientist, then, but a witch doctor. Nor are any of those that are attempting to explain creation without a Creator, because they are asking us to have faith in their unobservable theories (i.e. fraud). We cannot observe a parallel universe. Nothing in the universe suggests any contraction—only expansion. Suggesting physical and chemical laws without a lawgiver is the ultimate fraud. Oppositions of science falsely so-called indeed.

[ColdSteelTalon]

The short answer is no.

[aruanan]

Over the past few centuries, science can be said to have gradually chipped away at the traditional grounds for believing in God. Much of what once seemed mysterious—the existence of humanity, the life-bearing perfection of Earth, the workings of the universe—can now be explained by biology, astronomy, physics and other domains of science.

Although cosmic mysteries remain, Sean Carroll, a theoretical cosmologist at the California Institute of Technology, says there's good reason to think science will ultimately arrive at a complete understanding of the universe that leaves no grounds for God whatsoever. …

It sounds like something of the intellectual depth characteristic of Yahoo News/LiveScience.com.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

No.