science does not address a "Creator" for two basic reasons:
1. a Creator of the sort described in the various religious traditions humans have espoused cannot be described, defined, or subjected to testing on an empirical basis - nor can any claims concerning this Creator's nature: These Creator entities are supposedly quite capable of doing what they do without necessarily leaving any discernable trace.
2. it appears that physical reality functions without *need* of a Creator. Barring direct evidence of divine interference, science goes with the *natural* evidence it has.
Divine Creation *might* be the "Really *REAL* Reality"[tm]
otoh
Divine Creation might be an ad-hoc airplane built around a basalt cube.
There is a category of theories in quantum mechanics called 'hidden variable theories'. They exist, mostly, because some people dislike the 'metaphysics' of the conventional Copenhagen interpretation. And indeed, one of them might turn out to be valid, but the variables are really, really hidden.
"1. a Creator of the sort described in the various religious traditions humans have espoused cannot be described, defined, or subjected to testing on an empirical basis"
I like science. I am very interested in the scientific method, as long as it seeks The Truth of any matter.
When a particular element is left out of any research, then the conclusion Can Be called into question.
Scientifically there is inductive and deductive reasoning. We do not need to PROVE there is a God by testing or endeavoring to define Him.
As rational human beings we can perceive when an object has been well designed. Sometimes we are even able to distinguish the particular designer by looking at the form of the design.
The more I learn of humans, trees, grass, stars, the planets and what is on some of the planets, I perceive a very detail oriented design from one who thinks at such depth it is beyond our comprehension. The convoluted interconnectedness of all of this speaks so loudly of A Designer.
I wonder why we could not have scientific discussions that just take God as a GIVEN? We have all sorts of GIVENS that are much less pervasive and profound.
We don't even define particular GIVENs. They are just ACCEPTED.
We have Euclidian Geomety and Non-Euclidian Geometry.
Let us have Scientific Enquiry that Includes a possible vector from a Designer. To be tolerant let us name this the Non- Accident Scientific Method.
Don't you get tired of all these Scientific Pronouncements claiming something happened because of an accident. Isn't that a cop out.
Have a good day.