Several posters have commented that "science cannot allow God into science". This sounds like a legislative rule. The reality is quite different.
Science is methodologically limited to looking at only material causes. Science doesn't choose to eliminate God as a direct cause. Science must ignore God as a direct cause. That doesn't say that those are the only causes.
You want to find ALL causes/entities necessary for plant growth. So you go out and get a number of plants. You put them in the following conditions:
1. Sunlight, water, soil, air
2. Sunlight, water, soil, but in a clear box where the air has been pumped out.
3. Sunlight, water, no soil, air.
4. Sunlight, no water, soil, air
5. A darkened box with no sunlight, water, soil, air.
This scientific protocol will tell you if these 4 entities/causes are necessary for plant growth. You can add others if you wish but you will follow the same scientific protocol of having a control where you KNOW the entity is absent and compare it to an experimental where you KNOW the entity is present.
Now comes the kicker. How about the supernatural or God? Where is my control for that? Which plant can I point to and say "this one has NO supernatural in it?" I can't. Therefore I am limited to looking at only material causes that I can set up "controls" for.
Now you know why science is limited to the material. This is why science is agnostic and can't comment on the existence of deity or its role in nature.
Creationism isn't about God. Creationism is a material cause or process. Creationists propose a material mechanism by which God supposedly worked: fast formation of the earth in the recent past, manufacture of all "kinds" in their present form and unchanging.
What science tests is this material cause, not God. The material cause is wrong. Now, if you want to propose a different material cause such as "God created life by chemistry and the diversity of life through evolution over a period of several hundred million years." (theistic evolution) then science abundantly supports that material cause. But again, science is incapable of testing the "God" part becaues, since we can't set up a planet where we know God is absent, we don't know if the process would work in the absence of God.
Science is methodologically limited to looking at only material causes. Science doesn't choose to eliminate God as a direct cause. Science must ignore God as a direct cause. That doesn't say that those are the only causes.
You want to find ALL causes/entities necessary for plant growth. So you go out and get a number of plants. You put them in the following conditions:
1. Sunlight, water, soil, air
2. Sunlight, water, soil, but in a clear box where the air has been pumped out.
3. Sunlight, water, no soil, air.
4. Sunlight, no water, soil, air
5. A darkened box with no sunlight, water, soil, air.
This scientific protocol will tell you if these 4 entities/causes are necessary for plant growth. You can add others if you wish but you will follow the same scientific protocol of having a control where you KNOW the entity is absent and compare it to an experimental where you KNOW the entity is present.
Now comes the kicker. How about the supernatural or God? Where is my control for that? Which plant can I point to and say "this one has NO supernatural in it?" I can't. Therefore I am limited to looking at only material causes that I can set up "controls" for.
Now you know why science is limited to the material. This is why science is agnostic and can't comment on the existence of deity or its role in nature.
Creationism isn't about God. Creationism is a material cause or process. Creationists propose a material mechanism by which God supposedly worked: fast formation of the earth in the recent past, manufacture of all "kinds" in their present form and unchanging.
What science tests is this material cause, not God. The material cause is wrong. Now, if you want to propose a different material cause such as "God created life by chemistry and the diversity of life through evolution over a period of several hundred million years." (theistic evolution) then science abundantly supports that material cause. But again, science is incapable of testing the "God" part becaues, since we can't set up a planet where we know God is absent, we don't know if the process would work in the absence of God.
