Did Dawkins and Tyson say that and what are the implications.

[Jackie]

Science says whatever happened a being did not start it.

science or infallable scientists

You are confusing the tool with the person using the tool. When a scientist gets it wrong the ethical scientist scraps the bad data and method and starts over or moves on.

The tool of scientific method has lead to the WIDE concensus of those at the top of the QM field of study that a cognition is NOT required.

You are stupidly trying to turn back the clock because you don't like where the evidence is leading.

QM will not lead us to the existence of Allah, or Vishnu, or Thor or create the human ability for little boys to fly arround on brooms like Harry Potter.

Now if you got a problem with Stephen Hawkins "A god is not required", then argue with him.

Conduct your emperical studies get them peer reivewed by the elete like Hawkins and I am sure you will win a Nobel Prize in Science. But I am placing my bets that you'd have as much luck with that as a Muslim, Jew, Hindu or Mormon.

So lets make a date when you get your confirmed findings, how about a week from NEVER.

The reality as our top scientists findings is putting "all this" as being the result of a process, like winter changes into spring changing into summer changing into fall. QM is allowing us a much deeper understanding of this non cognitive process, but it is NOT pointing to a cognition as being a requirement for a starting point.

You merely like to turn reality into a comic book because it sounds nice to you. That is your baggage, not mine.