Science is inherently atheistic

[tackattack]

Ou, please, the supernature bullshit again.

Dude, WTH are you so scared of a word... boogie boogie supernatural. By definition it's attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature. I was just commenting that at one time getting sick was supernatural, then science ascribed it to bad smells, then to bacteria.

---

science uses the tools at hand to form and test hypothesis. I mean we went from rotten air makes us sick to bacteria makes us sick because of microscopes. We call the miasma theory obsolete now, because it's been disproved and rejected and surpassed because of better tools. Science has always assumed that what it has to measure with (whether logic, math, telescopes or colliders) is sufficient to find an answer. That woks in physics, metaphysics, biolgy all of them. My point was that it assumes that there can be an answer, which is fine. Which is why science will never be able to qualify the super-natural, just reveal superstition in the natural.

This depends on what you mean by the supernatural. Most who advance similar arguments don't have any real idea what they mean by supernatural and so it becomes an area inaccessible to science because it is not sufficiently defined, not because there is any methodological or other barrier. We can't study plortzgraf until we know what we mean by plortzgraf, either.

---

Defined above. Science is a great tool for describe the natural world, but if a supernatural one exists, we would need a different tool. Which would then give us understanding about something, making it natural. That's the process science uses to debunk supernatural claims.

Does that mean attributing sickness to bad smells was wrong? No science would just claim it had a less complete method of analyzing the same data, and that it's an obsolete understanding, supplanted by bacteria as the cause. Tools change as our perspective changes. What if 2000 years from now they measure the poop of a demon is what creates bacteria? I'm digressing now to the point- Science does though assume that an answer can be had by available methods. As our understanding and tools change so can our understanding grow.

I agree 100% with Brian's post on 35. Excellent and succinct statement.