Have you developed a test for God that can be used in the scientific process? Such a test would go a long way to proving your point but until such a test exists science will have to remain neutral, not hostile, to the question of if God exists and what effect he has on the universe.
Science may be neutral, but scientists are not. They need to be more objective, like they claim they are.
No, I haven’t but there’s none needed nor would it be accepted.
Scientists would find some alleged technicality to determine that the experiment wasn’t *scientific*, if only for the reason that it’s dealing with what they have labeled the *supernatural* and that the supernatural isn’t (allegedly) testable by the scientific method. They have predetermined that God cannot be tested so any experiment to try to *prove* Him would be rejected off hand.
Nice little Catch 22.
The evidence is staring you in the face, anyway. The order and complexity that science absolutely depends on is evidence enough. Order and complexity are observable phenomena.
Tell me... Don’t scientists consider an well planned and executed experiment to be indicators of intelligence and design in their work? Or is what happens in the lab just a random, unguided set of circumstances?
God exists and the evidence is more than scientific, but since it doesn’t fit within the parameters set by scientists, they will never acknowledge it as real. For so many, anything not labeled *scientific* doesn’t exist. The whole world cannot be reduced to a scientific experiment.
Have you developed a test for materialism that can be used in the scientific process? There are assumptions that science makes that are unfalsifiable.
Don’t mistake philosophy for science. This is my pet peeve about the crevo threads.