Opinion lang po.
how can a scientific tests, experiments be conducted, and be able to raise conclusion into something that does not exist. therefore, Science indicates that there is no god.
but, i believe God. this is only a discusyon. hehehhehe
Vistabel,
You do not make any sense at all. The question that you raised : "how can a scientific tests, experiments be conducted , and be able to raise conclusion into something that does not exist. therefore, science indicates that there is no god?" makes absolutely no sense. You are answering your own question, and you have effectively placed a blanket umbrella that 'Science' is free from error (error is integral to science, mind you). From analysis, it seems to me that you are referring to the notion of Empirical, Testable, Demonstrable Protocol (a part of scientific research).
When you present a scientific question in a scientific paper, it is advised that you do not infer a counter-argument to your intended hypothesis. In laymen's words, you do not ask a question and indirectly place an answer to said question while attempting to raise the question.
When you said, "...and be able to raise conclusion into something that does not exist...." that already tells the reader that you do not believe in God. And then you end it with a repetitive, "therefore , science indicates that there is no god."
But you say that you also believe in a God.
~~
If you know how to write a paper or have actually read an actual scientific paper (which includes a proposal, introduction, materials & methods, data & research, discussion and conclusion) you will know that science and scientific experiments DO NOT PROVE anything.
Scientific articles , which uses the art of data reasearch and implements Qi square tables, ANOVA techniques and statistics to support or counter the null hypothesis. Confidence interval of a p-value of <0.05 is the criterium for this decision (supporting or rejecting a null hypothesi).
And so, when we write a scientific paper one does not say, "WE PROVE THAT...." or say that "WE DO NOT PROVE THAT...". No.
If the hypothesis that one set out to study had positive correlative values and had a positive confidence interval, and had a P-value of <.05 then one would say that the hypothesis showed positive correlation etc etc, or if it didn't then one would say that there was negative correlation and therefore state the human errors that could have played a role in said results.
Empirical, Testable, Demonstrable Protocol requires a substance / material to be studied and subjected to statistical analysis in order to make any conclusion on the subject matter. Since we cannot capture or place God in a machine and dissect Him into pieces necessary for said tests, then it is impossible to even place him in the criteria in questioning his existence by Empirical, Testable, Demonstrable Protocol.
Therefore,
Science Cannot disprove God's existence. The way scientists write papers is not to 'prove' or 'disprove' anything, but to support that there is positive correlation or negative correlation in regards to a particular scientific processes in life/nature/molecular & biochemical pathway. There are no tru 'proofs' in science, considering the fact that there is and always be the underlying non-moving notion of 'Human Error' which can reduce or increase intervals being tested. And then there is always this little thing we call in biochemical research as "Mutation", which seems to counter and even destroy 'truths' in Medical Biochemistry.
Best,
Lorenzo.
Linkback:
https://tubagbohol.mikeligalig.com/index.php?topic=30758.0
Topic: Does theory of science believes the existence of god? (Read 4570 times)