Science doesn't rule out the concept of God (by definition), but it's stupid to say science relies on faith, it's not a religion.

Instead it is based on a lot more than the believe in thinking it's correct. It's based on laws, based on reproducible experiments, based on methods and basically based on actual proof as good as it can get.

Having faith in a God is not comparable at all to the reproducible knowledge science gives us.

Having faith in a God often implies disbelieving certain essential discoveries of science too, which hardly makes sense if you combine the two. You'll get silly ideologies where people believe in evolution, but still hold on to their believe in Jesus as being a supernatural God on Earth.

Remember that's a distinct difference in having confidence your methods are right and therefore the results tell us things about the truth, and having blind faith in something that hardly can be tested at all, let alone makes little sense in a theoretical and philosophical sense.

After all, why should there really even be a God when we already understand many of the ancient issues we used to invent Gods for??




Actually, you're quite wrong here. We may not be able to directly disprove God's existence (yet), but there's a whole lot we can certainly explain without supernatural causes. This is of course discarded by religious people, but in the end the 'faiths' you're speaking off are hardly the same kind.

Within science there's also a clear difference between laws, theories and so on. Sort of the different variations of how 'true' a certain idea will be. Contrary to religions, science doesn't arrogantly claim to have absolute knowledge though, hence why lots of theories are considered 'more than extremely likely to be true', but not considered absolute truth.

In a philosophical sense, science doesn't really deal with truths in an absolute sense at all, but only with relative knowledge.

This seems to be hard to grasp for religious people, but it's really not the same has having blind faith in an ancient and outdated idea for which there's no evidence at all.



It's very ironic how on one hand you say you can't possibly believe that something this incredible has happened while it clearly has, yet on the other hand you strongly believe a magical God must exist and be responsible even though that's really even much more far fetched and seemingly impossible.

After all, regardless of what started it, we can all witness right here and now where evolution and so on has brought us.



It's neither unexplainable nor inconceivable, it's basically not more than a philosophical answer anyways and nothing concrete. It's more a gigantic sign of not wanting to admit that you do not have an answer.

Not having an answer is fine, but pretending to know anyway is just incredible silly and strange.

Many people will have a 'gut feeling' that there should be an explanation or answer some where. But just because we're used to how things tend to make sense to some extent, doesn't mean it should be true for everything within our universe. Remember that in the most abstract way, things that 'seemingly do not make sense' are rather a good sign of our lack of understanding. I'm confident we can comprehend anything, not comprehending something simply means we should gather more knowledge so we CAN comprehend it.

The whole idea that things are too complex and unconceivable is just odd by definition, as it rules out future knowledge on beforehand.

So far, there's really absolutely no reason to assume Gods were either responsible for or present during the massive development of everything around us.