[Fester Chugabrew]

We have no way of knowing if the organization of matter just *is* or is the result of a *designer* or group of such designers or is the result of the flatulence of a Cosmic Deity.

That's a cop out, too. Science doesn't do that. Science has ways of knowing. Science is not in the business of telling itself what it cannot do, or what it cannot explore. Most reasonable people, however, would rule out "the flatulence of a Cosmic Deity" as a source or cause behind organized matter, dontcha think?

[js1138]

Science is not in the business of telling itself what it cannot do, or what it cannot explore.

It most certainly is.

[BlueStateDepression]

"Science has ways of knowing"

Are you a glottun for punishment?

That would be TESTING now wouldn't it.

This has been one FUN thread to watch develop.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"That's a cop out, too. Science doesn't do that. Science has ways of knowing."

Not without physical evidence it doesn't.

"Science is not in the business of telling itself what it cannot do, or what it cannot explore."

It most certainly DOES say what it can and can't do. Otherwise, it can be anything and everything, and accept any and all *claims* as being equally valid. That's mysticism, not science.

"Most reasonable people, however, would rule out "the flatulence of a Cosmic Deity" as a source or cause behind organized matter, dontcha think?"

On what grounds? ALL the competing ideas have the same amount of evidence: none.

[balrog666]

That's a cop out, too. Science doesn't do that. Science has ways of knowing. Science is not in the business of telling itself what it cannot do, or what it cannot explore. Most reasonable people, however, would rule out "the flatulence of a Cosmic Deity" as a source or cause behind organized matter, dontcha think?

D@mn! Just which version of Fester The Ignorant are you? I know you've heard of The Great Green Arkleseizure!