I felt the tug on the line.
We can see that Humankind has the necessary intelligence to understand space time sufficient that our theories about it can make accurate predictions. At present we appear to have a very good understanding of space time, and there is no obvious limit being approached concerning how deep our understanding can go.
Not sure that your opinion is a valid opinion. The current theory is String theory, which implies multiple universes, are you sure that the primate can understand everything?
Feel free to explain the mathematics of the theory of relativity to us. Perhaps you can break new ground in sub atomic physics, they seem to have hit a brick wall. In attempting to understand these exotic entities, I have heard it said, that our mathematics is insufficient to understand the results of the Large Hadron collider.
If you do your research you will discover that there are paradoxes, littered through our present understanding of the universe.
You'd have to define what you mean by 'exactly in the same manner'. Some things are the same, some things are different. We can look at volcanoes today and then look at the remains of ancient volcanoes, and this is good evidence that vulcanism works by the same process now that it did in the distant past. However, bombardment of the earth by meteors happens far less frequently now than in the past. So that is changed. Perhaps you need to define exactly which events you mean.
The size and rate of volcanism appears to have been larger in the past. The largest eruptions we know of all occurred millions of years ago. Is geology sufficient in itself to decipher the rate and scale of volcanism in the distant past?
We have good theories of physics, good because they have predicational accuracy and have survived many attempts to disprove them, that say that the speed of light is a constant in an unchanging medium. Note that as a bland statement 'the speed of light is a constant' is not true, as light moves at different speeds in different mediums. E.g. it is much slower in glass than it would be in a vacuum. It appears that there may be other things that can affect the speed of light.
The theory of relativity can make accurate predictions, yet ToE breaks down as you approach the singularity. The ToE also fails at the sub atomic level. It is not whether a theory can accurately predict events, the theory must cover all the bases. Hence, we have a new theory, String theory, a possible theory of everything.
This is a reasonable assumption given that there is no evidence of such Gods or such a spiritual realm, and that we understand the tendency of human beings to create religion, and that these religions are not fixed (as they would be if due to divine revelation), but differ in different cultures and change over time as they would do if they were myths. If you feel that there are Gods and/or a spiritual realm, then perhaps you could provide objective verifiable evidence that supports this.
We definitely have evidence for the existence of God, even observations, here is what He looks like.
I lifted my eyes and looked, and behold, there was a certain man dressed in linen, whose waist was girded with a belt of pure gold of Uphaz. His body also was like beryl, his face had the appearance of lightning, his eyes were like flaming torches, his arms and feet like the gleam of polished bronze, and the sound of his words like the sound of a tumult.
(Danial 10:5-6)
As we invented mathematics and as part of that defined what is true and what is not, the axioms of mathematics are true. However, the mathematics that we have developed has proved stupendously effective in understanding and predicting the world. Can you suggest any way in which our mathematics could be changed to better match reality? If not, what is the point of raising this?
It cannot be known whether mathematical axioms are true, that is why they are called axioms.
Here is an axiom.
Between any two points there exists a straight line.
This is an imaginary axiom, space time is curved and straight lines do not exist in reality.
Even circles do not exist in space time, it is all in your mind.
I can see that. Taking a wild guess, I suspect that you wish to maintain having issues with every discipline of science so that you can maintain your beliefs, even though if you wanted to your issues could easily be solved by actually understanding science.
Science is an attempt to understand space time by employing observation, measurement, testing, e.t.c. Science is assuming that all space time is an observable reality, the last fifty years in science is teaching us that it may not be comprehensible.