So...guess I'm the new guy

[Vincenzo Vinny G.]

OH.

MY.

DAWKINS.

I have put down in front of you, a platter. I literally spoon-feed you, point-by-point, the fact that science relies on an assumption that is scientifically unprovable. I provide a real-life example of such an assumption: The reliance on mathematical propositions. You can see, with your own eyes, that if you take science to be the only source of truth, and physicalism as the reigning paradigm within which to see the world, you CANNOT account for the very mathematical calculations you use to do science.

Thus, science is BY DEFINITION incomplete as a source of truth.

I literally cannot dumb this down any further. You have successfully bested me with your irrationality. Congrats.

Sure you can, just be yourself.
I'm sure you're just being modest. You seem as if you could single handedly dumb down the entire world.
I'm pretty certain the intellectual value of this forum drops everytime you add a post to it.

None of that qualifies as "metaphysical". Mathematics is a proven system of logic that makes no claim of a world beyond this one. It produces results and is applicable to the real world. You've presented evidence for another arguement entirely. Maybe focus on the query I put forward instead of the one you wish I had? Just a thought.
One last time, with feeling; Where are these metaphysical assumptions? Provide examples of at least one.

By the way, you shouldn't feel ashamed. Premature balding isn't that rare.

Mathematics itself can't be said to be metaphysical. But the corroboration between our understanding of logic and mathematics and the tendency of the observable world to correspond to this logical framework is a metaphysical assumption.

We observe it, but we have no reason to think that it is universal. Yet we work on the metaphysical assumption that it is universal. That any hypothesis or discovery is fundamentally logically or mathematically sound.