Originally Posted by ouroborous

Actually it's a very valid point. For something to be accepted as a (scientific) hypothesis, it must have explanatory power. The "everything is God" hypothesis has no such power. There's no theory to test, nothing to disprove. In fact, it can coexist 100% with the BB theory (the Big Bang could have been the beginning of all observable time and space, AND every atom could be part of God).

When a theory "explains" everything, then in reality it explains nothing. If a theory can't be tested, it's certainly not scientific in any way.

Hence the "everything is God" theory is really not a theory at all. It's just, as the respondant stated, a sort of vague wondering -- of the sort that seems really deep and meaningful at 3am or when stoned, but which in reality has just about no concrete meaning.

The Big Bang theory, on the other hand, produces specific, testable outcomes, many of which have been verified. It is therefore scientific and seems to fit the available evidence. Therefore, as an explanatory theory, it's clearly superior.

I blame the schools: it seems that people are so poorly educated in science and critical thinking that they can mistake the phrase "every atom is part of God" for a scientific theory. That statement may have some meaning in a theological context, but it has nothing to do with science.

Originally Posted by 911

After going past "blaming the schools" then what?

Originally Posted by David Vestal

Live life, be happy, and try not to screw the world up any more than it already is. Improve it, even. Why do so many people seem unable to see this as a valid godless approach to life?