Replies

"I'm not talking about relativistic physics or germ theory. I'm talking about science in general, and a particular statement many of its adherents agree to, namely that, "God is beyond the purview of science." "

Almost ALL scientists adhere to that statement, except for a few eccentrics and cranks. So, if you are going to criticize evolution for not mentioning God, you must criticize ALL science for not mentioning God.

"This is an inherently atheistic point of view."

No, it most definitely is not. Atheism is the conviction that God doesn't exist. YOU don't get to redefine the English language to fit your religion. Atheism is not the position of science. The position of science about God is, "Ask a theologian." You are condemning science for not being theology. You desperately want your theological beliefs to have the imprimatur of science without having to have any of the rigor of science.

"But it is not the federal government's prerogative to establish and espouse only such a point of view."

Science textbooks espouse NO POINT OF VIEW about the existence of God. It is non-Theistic.

Atheism is the conviction that God doesn't exist.

Yes it is. And when applied to those who undertake science with the understanding that God is beyond its purview, it causes science to be atheistic. In such cases God does not exist in the eyes of science.

Maybe you think science and theology need to be sealed up in little hermetic bags, and never the twain shall meet. But you have no scientific basis for holding such an opinion, just as you have no scientific basis for excluding God from the purview of science.