Why does science always upstage God?

[Mister Agenda]

"It gets around your accusation that I accused you of being ignorant."
I'm following science; you're not. I'm not the one that is ignorant; you are.
"You assert that the laws of science support your conclusions, but they do not."
Then why can't you get around them? Because you can't so you fill in space.
"Again you've latched onto the notion that I'm asserting that you are ignorant when I've said nothing of the kind."

Without going back on other pages, was it you that brought up the argument from ignorance? I believe I was going by what we KNOW and you don't want to face what we know. You want to throw out all we know and just say we don't know. Then you know nothing. You have to follow that all the way through. You can say we don't really know 2 + 2 = 4. Just throw out what we know. You can do that with anything. Then be that way. Be a brat that if you don't like what the evidence shows, just claim we don't know yet. It's your life and I don't care.

For the last time, the Argument from Ignorance is an informal fallacy that described your argument, not an accusation that you, personally, are ignorant. It's also called an Appeal to Ignorance, claiming something is true because it has not yet been proven false, or false because it has not yet been proven true. It excludes alternate possibilities, like the answer being unknowable, knowable only in the future, or not yet thoroughly investigated enough to make a determination, or only incompletely true or false. It often involves a shifting of the burden of proof. It is not the statement 'you are ignorant' or 'you are wrong because you are ignorant'.

But if you are determined to be offended, there's nothing I can do about that. My best to you and yours.