[Dimensio]

Any attempt to claim science must only be concerned with "nature" is an arbitrary demarcation.

No, it's the fundamental nature of science. Yes, all definitions are "arbitrary" as human inventions, but claiming that science can encompass the supernatural is redefining the long-standing definition of science as it is currently established.

[unlearner]

"claiming that science can encompass the supernatural is redefining the long-standing definition of science as it is currently established."

To remain consistent you must then object to current experiments in particle physics trying to demonstrate fundamental forces working in dimensions which CANNOT be experienced directly.

Scientific observation is obviously limited to what is observable. To extrapolate this to limit scientific inquiry is bias in its purist form.

I have never heard anyone arguing against super colliders exploring string theory even when its foremost proponent admits the theory is not falsifiable.

I have never heard the advocates of pure science stand up to oppose theoretical physicists from exploring the possibility of dimensions of existence which cannot be experienced directly.

I am willing to limit the observations of science to what is observable. But the conclusions must be limited by only what is real.

Those in the forum who advocate "only science in the science class" need to be consistent and advocate the removal of mathematics from science. If you stick to your definition limiting science to nature, we should remove math from science.