Replies

Is saying that microbes were outside the purview of science before the invention of the microscope the same as saying that microbes don't exist?

No. And saying God is outside the purview of science is not the same thing as saying God does not exist. Saying microbes are outside the purview of science is unscientific and "amicrobistic" whether or not we have tools to observe them. So is saying God is outside the purview of science whether or not we have the tools to observe Him (either directly or indirectly).

No. And saying God is outside the purview of science is not the same thing as saying God does not exist.

I'll ask for CG... Yet that's precisely what "atheism" is: affirming that God does not exist. Are you then retracting your claim that it is "atheistic" to claim that "God is outside the purview of science"?

"And saying God is outside the purview of science is not the same thing as saying God does not exist."

Then by definition it CAN'T BE an atheistic statement.

"Saying microbes are outside the purview of science is unscientific and "amicrobistic" whether or not we have tools to observe them."

So, in 1100 AD, when there was no way to study microbes, it would have been perfectly scientific to make up theories about tiny organisms you couldn't detect and couldn't test for? What value could these theories have? How could they be tethered to the real world when there was no way to test them?

"So is saying God is outside the purview of science whether or not we have the tools to observe Him (either directly or indirectly)."

ANYTHING that we don't have the tools to examine or test is automatically outside the realm of science. That is what makes science different from other forms of inquiry; it REQUIRES testing and observations. You want to broaden the definition of science to include mystical musings and navel gazing.