Is Science a Religion?

That's pretty much exactly the sort of woowoo that I don't really have any interest in, or time for. Good luck with it, though.

Nonsense. We can and have, because we've directly observed it. I mean, where are all the new species coming from, otherwise?

..wha?

LOL!Sorry, Rob. The only thing that's rising is my puzzlement at how long you can go on spewing bullshit before even you realize you're not making any sense. Like, your last post.(Oh, and incidentally - it's well-known that, in fact, even a frog hops out of the pot long before it's hot enough to do any damage.)Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.

This is nonsense. Of course it's obvious; nobody acts like things happen in a vacuum. In fact the hardest thing for human beings to do is accept that two promixmal occurrences are unrelated. We see patterns everywhere; it's not unique to science or religion, it's just what people do. It's how gods get invented, in fact.I mean, why would an intelligence evolve that couldn't perceive how things were related? How would intelligence even be possible otherwise? You're just assuming your conclusion - circular reasoning. We could just easily say that the principle is purely scientific. Or that it's neither religious nor scientific, but epistemological.

I don't see that the universe has to do anything at all, and I don't understand what you mean by "act in unity", and I don't think you do, either. No, they don't. Only by assuming it; thus, your argument is circular. QED. Science makes no claim as to the "unity" of anything, whatever that means.