Quote:
I disagree in principle although with some qualifiers I would agree. If one specifically states that they are conducting a scientific inquiry then there are rules of engagement that define how theories should be constructed. In some sense science is the exercise of trying to describe the universe as completely as possible without invoking the existence of God to cover gaps. I am ok with that. I am a scientist and I never would consider God as the answer to a scientific question.
I would go one step further (or maybe closer?) and just say "science tries to explain the universe as completely as possible period. One doesn't have to know what god is to do science anymore than 1 has to know about the matrix or magic dragons. It's only when these ideas start having measurable impacts on the universe that they need to become part of science and god has not done that yet, just like all the other crazy ideas I can come up with.
Quote:
On the other hand, more fundamentally, a theory without physical test is just that. Although the rules of science may indicate that one be considered rather than another, without a test there is no way to say which is correct.
This is true, but I think the notion of a "test" has changed over time. Reproducibility is a big deal, but I don't think the lack of it should keep cosmology from being a science.
Quote:
In response to your questions about God's motivation for doing things the way He has, I could easily postulate rational reasons for all of those things. That does not prove that they happened, but it does eliminate them as definitive counterexamples. Frankly, I have always been impressed with your approach to things, so I would bet that you could answer your own questions also. Therefore, I will not bother.
I agree that you could do that, so it isn't worth going over. I'll try to say my point as concisely as possible. I think the multiverse idea, though hugely problematic from a testability standpoint, should be considered more likely than things like god and the matrix because atleast there are hints from physics that something like the multiverse is possible. I admit that it is very possible we are wrong about this.
If the universe requires a creator, I think gods that it makes no sense to worship, like 5D junior high science students that are actually fairly incompetent, are much much more likely than omnipotent religion like gods.