Science is inherently atheistic

[Paleophyte]

Science is inherently secular. It does not attempt to address topics for which there is no quantifiable evidence.

It does not calculate the breadth of faith nor does it define the mass of piety. Science takes no position on belief. For this you should be grateful.

[tackattack]

[GrandizerII]

It is mostly irrelevant to them that some religious people have also argued that what he says about infinity applies to God as well.

Unless the theist does not agree with the possibility of an actual infinity, in which case they would not agree that God is infinite.

[ignoramus]

Tack, I think with so much weird shit we see and postulate as far as cosmology, astro physics and atomic theory, I think it's fair to say that nothing is assumed about anything.
The quantum world alone is contradictory to "our" natural universe to start with, so I don't imagine any scientist worrying too much about natural/supernatural definitions when everything they hypothesize is beyond batshit crazy, beyond God, beyond anything I can imagine. Basically, The scientific method shouldn't and doesn't assume anything in case any underlying premise is false and they're just wasting their time

[tackattack]

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.

[ignoramus]

True. Maybe only a god can know god? Agree? You know where I'm going next don't you

[Anomalocaris]

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.

Ou, please, the supernature bullshit again.

[blue grey brain]

On the contrary, science continues to be an atheistic endeavour. 

I think you may be conflating atheistic with secular.   Many of the greatest scientists were deeply religious but their achievements meant being able to set aside magical thinking to investigate the actual evidence.  I'd be surprised if many weren't inspired by their god beliefs and concluded that what they found was evidence of their god's subtlety and wisdom.

If you read any of the references I left, you'd probably find out that the scientific revolution/age of enlightenment was both secular and atheistic in nature.

• I think the issue here, is that most people feel atheism stops at rejecting or lacking belief in God. A somewhat thorough read-through of Wikipedia/atheism will underline how incomplete that picture of atheism is.
  

Side-note: Being inspired to do science, doesn't generate any science. As you'll probably find out on Wikipedia/atheism, modern science came about by secular or atheistic means.

Side-note: It is also not surprising that most humans were theists, including scientists back then, especially because mankind did not always have modern science (so religion or archaic science/protoscience preceded it) or some of the modern tools which can be used to properly disregard religion. Also note persecution of the non-religious, as you'll see on Wikipedia/religious persecution.

[Belacqua]

[blue grey brain]