Re: Evidence for "Big Bang Theory"

Kai Henningsen (
04 May 1995 21:32:00 +0100 wrote on 01.05.95 in <>:

> In article
> <>, China
> <> wrote:
> > fine. however, I'd hesitate to allow that the scientific realm
> > encompases all existence. As in, as you say, there is no basis to prove
> > or disprove the existence of God. So if God exists, it is at a level as
> > yet inaccessible to science.
> Not quite. The existence of God is not a scientific question. It cannot
> be addressed by the scientific method. This is fundamental to the method,
> not a limitation of current technology or of scientific understanding. If
> God exists, science cannot prove it. If God does not exist, science
> cannot prove it. If God existed once, but doesn't any more, science
> cannot prove it. If God will exist in the future, science cannot prove
> it...

Not quite. If God exists _and_causes_no_observable_phenomena_, then
science can't tell us about that. If he _did_ cause such phenomena,
science _could_ tell us about it.

The interesting part is that religions often _do_ claim that he causes
observable phenomena ...


Bang: major_backbone!!kai
## CrossPoint v3.02 ##