Question for agnostics and atheists

[tackattack]

There are many other examples, feel free to google them if you like.

What does it matter whether or not closed systems exist in nature? They exist all the same and have their own way of being described by thermodynamics. You ask what the point is in forming hypothesis about things not occurring in nature - well where do you think all of our human inventions fit into that line of thinking? They don't exist in nature but still have real world implications.

I will and fair enough.

Science demands a certain level of verification for all claims, it also demands that the hypothesis be testable, falsifiable, repeatable and open to independent examination and peer review. It also makes predictions that can continually be tested as more data comes in, and when the data does not match the predictions then you begin the process of re-examining all the evidence abd formulating new hypothesis.

You, on the other hand, have no such basis for your claims, they are not able make predictions about the universe that we can test for validity, meaning you can provide absolutely no reason for anyone to accept your claims nor any way of ever being able to know whether or not they are true.

true, nor am I asking anyone to accept my claims.. just express their own claims.