You try to dismiss real and very carefully done scientific work by equivocating it to assumptions made before the scientific method was discovered. You try to safeguard your statements by use emotional words like "seems to me". You dismiss science with these vague emotive phrases then purport that since the theory's of science are subject to revisionism that they are as equally true or untrue as supernatural or mythological sources.
You are trying to use "Argument from authority" in a phrase where Einstein was talking about music to devalue empirical data. The whole point of asking for any empirical data for god is because there has been none so far. There is empirical data for music it just has little value. This is a false dichotomy on your part.
tl;dr
The complete lack of empirical data is not the same as empirical data having little value.
You are trying to use "Argument from authority" in a phrase where Einstein was talking about music to devalue empirical data. The whole point of asking for any empirical data for god is because there has been none so far. There is empirical data for music it just has little value. This is a false dichotomy on your part.
tl;dr
The complete lack of empirical data is not the same as empirical data having little value.
