i really dont want to get into an endless conversation about the nature of science, the principle of sufficient cause, the role that presuppositions play in our interpretation of the facts, etc. because that conversation will never end.
this is the only thing I want to get across =
The only thing you are getting across is that you believe that we live in a universe that we do not and cannot understand - an irrational universe ruled by mystical whims. And if you really believe that - and I am going to take you at your word that you do - the simple fact is that we have no common basis for a discussion.
despite what you may think, there are incredibly intelligent people, extremely well educated in the relevant fields of science, who do not buy into the whole "big bang+evolution over billions of years" theory of history.
The wonderful thing about science is that it doesn't require anyone to "buy into" anything. Science is about looking at a set of facts, and examining how closely the predictions of a theory match those facts. It's about observing the world around us and knowing that it
can be understood.
But whether or not these incredibly intelligent, extremely well-educated people buy into the "big bang+evolution over billions of years" isn't the question. The question is do they have a scientific theory which they propose instead? One that explains the evidence we have and makes testable predictions? If they don't have such theories to propose, then what are we talking about?
Now, you all can go on believing whatever you like to believe. Your going to do that anyways. But what you cant do is claim that every intelligent and educated person will come to the same conclusions as you do. the secular scientific community is changing their theories on a daily basis and it will not be long until this current model is thrown out in favor of a new one which is thought to be more accurate.
Theories don't change on a "daily" basis, but even if they did, so what? That's how science works. We observe something, formulate a theory, use it to make predictions. If our predictions are good, our confidence increases, but we keep an open mind for something better. If our predictions are slightly wrong or if new facts come to light then we try to understand what's happening and attempt to refine our theory. And if that fails, yes, we look for a better theory.
Look, we get it: you have a fundamental dislike for science and the scientific process and think that knowledge can only be gained in mystical, unknowable ways.
This may sound cruel, but it's a pity that people like you - who hate science - get to reap the benefits that the hard work of scientists, across the world and across the ages, has brought us.
