Re: Evidence for "Big Bang Theory"

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Michael Bauser: "Re: zoosexual cave art?"
• Previous message: jacobson_n@msdisk.wustl.edu: "RE: Best American Composer."

In article <Yasha-0105952036480001@wildmaciici.tamu.edu>,
Yasha Hartberg <Yasha@bigraf.tamu.edu> wrote:
>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...

I agree partly. However if God interacted with the universe in some
testable or distinguishable way, then God might be relevant to science.
But so far people haven't found such an interaction. It is possible that
someone might devise something testable in the future, but I can't
image that now.

• Next message: Michael Bauser: "Re: zoosexual cave art?"
• Previous message: jacobson_n@msdisk.wustl.edu: "RE: Best American Composer."