[unlearner]

"Which, lest we forget, after much wrangling, you graciously conceded was, in fact, a valid way to do science."

What I conceded was that my arguments against natural history as science are inadequate. I still contend that historical events are not falsifiable. You have demonstrated fairly well that they can serve in providing supporting data within a scientific theory.

But fair enough. If it can be demonstrated with some form of support that the universe began from nothing, then you would be able to support the general something from nothing position. That is probably the only place it could be found anyway, since the influence of any mass at all would extend throughout space.

I just think "something from nothing" is outside the scope of natural science - very much like the supernatural. It might be within the scope of math, as well as philosophy. It might even be complimentary to science. But I am skeptical that science could be used exclusively to support such a claim.

[donh]

What I conceded was that my arguments against natural history as science are inadequate. I still contend that historical events are not falsifiable. You have demonstrated fairly well that they can serve in providing supporting data within a scientific theory.

If it's not falsifiable, it isn't science. Your memory of this conversation leaves something to be desired. I spent a considerable amount of effort to get you past that hurdle, and now you have retrenched to the brain-dead contention that modern astronomy, paleo-geology, and paleo-meteorology aren't sciences, and predicting elements in a periodic table isn't a potentially falsifiable experiment. You put on a good show of being genuinely interested, and you fooled me good. Please address further inquiries to someone else.

[donh]

I just think "something from nothing" is outside the scope of natural science - very much like the supernatural. It might be within the scope of math, as well as philosophy. It might even be complimentary to science. But I am skeptical that science could be used exclusively to support such a claim.

Exactly right. "something from nothing" is a supernatural claim, just as is the law of conservation of something-ness" you have proposed. There is no scientific law that states that something must come from something. If there were, you could locate it for me in a scientific treatise.