Dr. David R. Liu, a professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Harvard seems to think that the purpose of science is to create stories/theories in regard to the origin of life that – well, as he says, ‘’my expectation is that we will be able to reduce this to a very simple series of logical events that could have taken place with no divine intervention.”
Myth 1: The theory of intelligent design is a modern version of Creationism.
Fact: The theory of intelligent design goes back at least as far as classical Greece and it has been debated in nearly every century since then.
…"as a blind man has no idea of colors," Newton wrote, "so we have no idea of the manner by which the all-wise God perceives and understands all things." But the structure of the universe provides a clue, enabling us to "know (God) . . . by his most wise and excellent contrivances of things, and final causes." As for the idea that science could lead to atheism, Newton dismissed it brusquely: "Blind metaphysical necessity, which is certainly the same always and everywhere, could [not] produce [the] variety of things" found on our diverse and ever-surprising world…
ALL scientific theories only work with natural, material causes."
Scientific proof is based on showing that something is a fact by repeating the event in the presence of the person questioning the fact. There is a controlled environment where
observations can be made, data drawn, and hypotheses empirically verified.
Now if the scientific method was the only method of proving something,you couldn't prove that you went to first hour class this morning or that you had lunch today.There's no way you can repeat those events in a controlled situation.
(from More Than A Carpenter, by Josh McDowell)
Using this criteria, is a "scientific theory" scientific or is it just an idea a scientist has?