Replies

Science doesn't operate from a theistic or an atheistic point of view, it operates from an agnostic point of view.

Much as we would all like to think so, that simply is not true. You cannot denude observers of their inherent biases. Science cannot happen without human observers. While it may appear to be totally illogical, the reality of theistic and atheistic assumptions effects science continually. It's not a bad thing. It just is.

Obviously science makes a good many statements that make no reference whatsoever to a deity or lack thereof. That does not make the science itself agnostic. It only makes its particular statements agnostic.

Bear in mind that all the heat we are generating over this issue touches on a very small segment of what science is about. The objective agreement between atheists and theists when it comes to science is tremendous.

We are not having riots and lawsuits in my town because our public schools make use of science textbooks that exclude references to God. We should not have riots and lawsuits either if someone happens to come along and suggest that organized matter behaving according to predictable laws may be better explained by intelligent design.

" Much as we would all like to think so, that simply is not true."

Much as you would like to think otherwise, it IS true. Science is agnostic not theistic or atheistic.

"Obviously science makes a good many statements that make no reference whatsoever to a deity or lack thereof. That does not make the science itself agnostic. It only makes its particular statements agnostic."

Science IS the statements made, not the other opinions that scientists have on other subjects. Science HAS to be agnostic regarding the existence of a God, because there is no way to make a choice using science about the existence of a God.

"We should not have riots and lawsuits either if someone happens to come along and suggest that organized matter behaving according to predictable laws may be better explained by intelligent design."

Well, you are in disagreement with yourself, because you have already said that neither option {explaining everything with a Designer(God), explaining everything without a Designer(God)} is better and there is no way to chose between the two. Maybe you should duke it out with yourself first before you attempt to debate others. :)