[GoLightly]

"The other side" knows there is no way to measure the supernatural using the methods of science.

I stacked the deck in that specific governing body for a reason that had nothing to do with the scientific method.

[stands2reason]

How big is God? How do you measure him?

[Gumlegs]

I stacked the deck in that specific governing body for a reason that had nothing to do with the scientific method.

Curious, it seems to be an attack on the scientific method by using a thinly veiled variant on Pascal's wager. You know, your words about how "his reason *may* be taking him down the incorrect path."

Then there's this: ToE "fits the facts" for philosophical reasons... the possibility of all "supernatural" explanations have to be excluded, as they fall outside of the realm of all "real" science. The study of science has fallen into a circular argument, favoring one philosophy over all others.

This is not a circular argument. Science has no means for measuring the supernatural, so it must exclude it. (Not deny it, just exclude it). Your complaint is akin to rejecting a yardstick because it won't give you the barometric pressure.