Verified answer

God can not be a hypothesis.

1)Science only deals with nature

2)Nature is time-space.

3)Time-space originated with the Big Bang

4)Everything pre-Big Bang must by definition be beyond nature.

Therefore, science cannot justifiably comment on God. QED.

Philosophy should be the tool of discovery in this sense.

{Sigh}...... Logic is easy to learn, considering that it's logical, and can be thoroughly revealed in at most 24 pages. It is basic to both Philosophy and to Mathematics. Here is an example of Syllogistic Reasoning {from the general to the specific)

No one should be in R&S who has not studied logic.

{Yahoo! Answers Participant} obviously has not studied logic.

Therefore, {Y!AP} should not be in R&S.

Sorry, that is not meant as a personal insult, but most people in this section fail this syllogism.

Since when are Postulates "ranked in science"? Postulates (or axioms) are mathematics, specifically. Are some better, higher, worse or lower? Any beginning point, any non-empirical given, is a postulate. All are of equal weight.

Who ranks "theories" and hypotheses"? Each may be a valid Explanation of the facts. Usually, hypothesis is what you call it before an experiment. It's a "new idea" . Theory is what you call it afterward, until it is disproved.

"Rational people" is an undefined term, and so is "Christian", and so I ask the entire Room generally, since this is a good place to do it, Why are you All here without having done your preparation and homework?"

Evolution can be divided into two parts, macro and micro. Microevolution is a fact, where as macroevolution remains a theory due to debates on the exact steps of the evolutionary process. EVOLUTION DID HAPPEN we simply can’t trace the exact evolutionary steps of the of the 3 trillion plus species on earth. Considering there is no way that we can even prove if we have located all the species on earth, this may always remain a theory. We can prove though, beyond a doubt, that humans have evolved. We can trace it back conclusively 3.6 million years. 97% of all scientists accept evolution (so does the Catholic Church). Christians have spread lies about this excessively; they say evolution preaches that Humans evolved from monkeys. Evolution does not state that humans evolved from monkeys, that idea is completely absurd. Science states that monkeys and humans evolved from a shared forefather and are hence relatives, (all primates are) but we are in no way direct descendants of them.

Actually many renowned scientist including Darwin believe in God. IN fact when Dawkins ignorantly said you must be an Atheist to be a scientist, much of his community chastised him.

God is not a theory true, he is a being. Not in the sense you can define because you have no reference point to ascertain from.

As far as science being hypothesis, ( an idea ) a theory ( testing your idea ) and conclusion ( the results of your test ) based not only on tangible items but history, and the natural progression of thought, God has reached way past the lowest rank as you put it. There is historical, recorded, physical, archaeological, paleontological, and more evidence to support God's claim of existing and things occurring as he set them into being.

The great flood, science has proved, and even theorizes how it occurred, and has found evidence existing today to support it both within our planet and viewing the atmospheric coverings of planets within our own galaxy.

You are correct sir, God is not a hypothesis, but a viable theory or belief, that science itself grows closer too, with each new discovery. So please don't suppose to speak for science or scientists, but only for your own limited capacity to consider, coupled with your obvious emotional attachment to the subject of God, there is malice in your comment, not very scientific.

Evolution is the best guess for now just like the earth was flat a few hundred years ago.

Even though evidence shows otherwise, people cling to Evolution. I am not speaking of religious evidence. I am speaking of missing links, mathematics improbabilities, origin impossibilities, etc.

Why do people cling to evolution (or big bang or any other non-intelligent design model)?

Because they do not have any moral implications. A person can believe in spontaneous life, DNA mutations, universal expansion and contraction as a 'why are we here?' answer. And they can do whatever they want.

Once they turn to anything with a God, they have to admit that they are not the 'moral judge' of their life. And that is uncomfortable.

But truth is truth no matter who tries to define it. Be sure of what you know. Don't bet your soul on another's oversight.

To the fish in an ocean, the desert isn't even a hypothesis. You're being disingenuous by using hypothesis two different ways here. I freely grant that God is not a scientific hypothesis. But you're going to have to provide a pretty compelling argument if you want to convince me that all of reality can be adequately explained scientifically. As you are full aware, such scientism has little intellectual respectability, even among atheists.

peace

what is rational about coming from an ape ? that is not rational that is just a thought that a man who was mad at God started to prove there is not God ....At the end of his life he repented and told his fellows that. If you want evolution that is just an idea to be your make up of your life so be it but dont try to tell our childern that theory means they dont know it is an idea that will not be proven it is easy evolution is you religion ok so do as you all like you know if there was absult prof of this people might think hmmm but again it is nothing and if you belive this so much why isnt it happening now why dont we see the caveman or the monkeyman apeman where are they oh i forgot there arent any It is all about proving that there is not God and you will just have to wait and see how wrong it is read Darwins bio lol the point of evelution is really a mute point...oh people who believe in creation ARE chirstians

It is impossible to prove any theory of origins "scientifically," because the very essence of the scientific method is based upon OBSERVATION and EXPERIMENTATION, and no scientist has ever observed or experimented with the origin of the universe

All scientists know this, including L. Harrison Matthews. In his forward to Darwin's 1971 edition of "Origin of the Species", Matthews says, "". . .Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation--both are concepts which believers know to be true but neither, up to the present, has been capable of proof." In other words, the theory of evolution is a theory based on FAITH, rather than scientific fact.

I no more believe in evolution than I do gravity, these things do not need my belief to exist. Evolution is not a theory, it is a Scientific fact in the science community and they would be the authority on what's is fact and what is Theory on a theory that spawned from that very same community.

Evolution is only a theory in the same way the earth circling the sun is "just a theory."