Bill Nye To Debate Creationist At Creation Museum February 4th (2 Viewers)

[Ministry of Pain]

I just want to make sure I am clear on this…Ham and Creationists for the most part believe the Earth is about 6,000 years old, how do they explain the dinosaurs? We KNOW they date bad millions of years, science proves it so how do they get around that tough issue?

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

I just want to make sure I am clear on this…Ham and Creationists for the most part believe the Earth is about 6,000 years old, how do they explain the dinosaurs? We KNOW they date bad millions of years, science proves it so how do they get around that tough issue?

That dating is all wrong, you see.

 

[Mr. Pickles]

I just want to make sure I am clear on thisHam and Creationists for the most part believe the Earth is about 6,000 years old, how do they explain the dinosaurs? We KNOW they date bad millions of years, science proves it so how do they get around that tough issue?

That dating is all wrong, you see.

Ham didn't seem to be bothered that all of the "wrong" dating still suggested a very very old earth.

 

[Scoresman]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/06/could-creationism-become-law.html

Seems like an act of desperation at this point. They lost the war on contraception, lost the war on abortion, are losing the war on gay marriage, this is all they have left and are clinging to a belief system that is quite frankly, becoming a fossil.

 

[joffer]

If I was Nye, I would have just kept hammering on all the evidence for an old earth/universe. Of course his lemmings can't accept evolution because it can't happen in 6000 years. If you can get past the Ussher age crap, the rest gets easier.

 

[LinusMarr]

Isn't there a way to use DNA to determine if native americans are descended from isrealites? I mean, we're all related in some way, but can't we trace lineage somehow?

Smart guys? Can we debunk this Mormon hooey?

It's not a question of "has it been debunked", because that part is easy.

The problem is getting people whose belief systems are rooted in assumptions to change their views based on evidence.

Not going to happen with religious people.

What about it, PeenusMarr?

Sorry, Ive never bought into the we were all lizard, monkey people that crawled out of the ocean theory. Enjoy that tho, cornelius....

But you buy into the "POOF, you're created!" theory?

I believe in what the bible says. You either choose to have "faith" or you dont....

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Isn't there a way to use DNA to determine if native americans are descended from isrealites? I mean, we're all related in some way, but can't we trace lineage somehow?

Smart guys? Can we debunk this Mormon hooey?

It's not a question of "has it been debunked", because that part is easy.

The problem is getting people whose belief systems are rooted in assumptions to change their views based on evidence.

Not going to happen with religious people.

What about it, PeenusMarr?

Sorry, Ive never bought into the we were all lizard, monkey people that crawled out of the ocean theory. Enjoy that tho, cornelius....

But you buy into the "POOF, you're created!" theory?

I believe in what the bible says. You either choose to have "faith" or you dont....

Yes and you have to go to "faith". So you have an excuse to not think or be reasonable.

And the Bible says 1) what the Jews religion said (which was explicitly not for Christians) and then 2) what Man said it would say when they created it 300 years after Jesus.

So do you believe/know (or have faith in) that the other animals/plants on earth evolved?

 

[jdoggydogg]

I just want to make sure I am clear on this…Ham and Creationists for the most part believe the Earth is about 6,000 years old, how do they explain the dinosaurs? We KNOW they date bad millions of years, science proves it so how do they get around that tough issue?

Years ago when I was around 18 and not very nice about these topics, someone once told me that Noah's flood killed the dinosaurs. I said, "Well what about carbon dating?" She said, "That's just a theory." I knew this conversation wouldn't be productive, so the nicest thing I could think to say was, "It's a scientific theory! Which means it's proven over and over again until it's disproven! Gotta go!"

 

[Sabertooth]

I'm as atheist as anyone in here, but going around starting debates with kids who are handing out bibles seems like a pretty dbag move. It's not like they're picketing someone's funeral.

No they're just hijacking school curricula and making the planet dumber

Bam!

so teaching people that they should be peaceful and forgive trespasses is dumb?

 

[Scoresman]

I'm as atheist as anyone in here, but going around starting debates with kids who are handing out bibles seems like a pretty dbag move. It's not like they're picketing someone's funeral.

No they're just hijacking school curricula and making the planet dumber

Bam!

so teaching people that they should be peaceful and forgive trespasses is dumb?

don't need to hand out bibles to do that.

 

[Sabertooth]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

 

[Sabertooth]

I'm as atheist as anyone in here, but going around starting debates with kids who are handing out bibles seems like a pretty dbag move. It's not like they're picketing someone's funeral.

No they're just hijacking school curricula and making the planet dumber

Bam!

so teaching people that they should be peaceful and forgive trespasses is dumb?

don't need to hand out bibles to do that.

how often have you done it?

 

[Scoresman]

I'm as atheist as anyone in here, but going around starting debates with kids who are handing out bibles seems like a pretty dbag move. It's not like they're picketing someone's funeral.

No they're just hijacking school curricula and making the planet dumber

Bam!

so teaching people that they should be peaceful and forgive trespasses is dumb?

don't need to hand out bibles to do that.

how often have you done it?

everyday.

 

[LinusMarr]

I'm as atheist as anyone in here, but going around starting debates with kids who are handing out bibles seems like a pretty dbag move. It's not like they're picketing someone's funeral.

No they're just hijacking school curricula and making the planet dumber

Bam!

so teaching people that they should be peaceful and forgive trespasses is dumb?

don't need to hand out bibles to do that.

how often have you done it?

everyday.

Yes, your "tolerance" for people who have different views is off the hook!

 

[jwp]

I can't decide if I'm sad or amazed we are having this debate still in the year 2014. I wish I lived far enough into the future where these people become marginalized. I doubt society ever rids itself of them but over time it will get better (unless of course that imaginary guy up in the sky does something to show himself to everyone).

 

[LinusMarr]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

The monkey man did it, dont ya know...

 

[Sabertooth]

Tell me about the conversation you had today with somebody where you counseled them to forgive transgression?

 

[Scoresman]

Tell me about the conversation you had today with somebody where you counseled them to forgive transgression?

My wife yelled at me this morning because I said I would fix the ceiling light in the kitchen but didn't get to it last night. I counseled her about forgiving the transgression of mine and then went to work.

 

[DrJ]

I can't decide if I'm sad or amazed we are having this debate still in the year 2014. I wish I lived far enough into the future where these people become marginalized. I doubt society ever rids itself of them but over time it will get better (unless of course that imaginary guy up in the sky does something to show himself to everyone).

The debate will continue forever until science offers a better explanation that "if you have enough monkeys and enough typewriters..."

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

I'm as atheist as anyone in here, but going around starting debates with kids who are handing out bibles seems like a pretty dbag move. It's not like they're picketing someone's funeral.

No they're just hijacking school curricula and making the planet dumber

Bam!

so teaching people that they should be peaceful and forgive trespasses is dumb?

don't need to hand out bibles to do that.

how often have you done it?

I do it every day just about sans fairy tales.

 

[Scoresman]

I'm as atheist as anyone in here, but going around starting debates with kids who are handing out bibles seems like a pretty dbag move. It's not like they're picketing someone's funeral.

No they're just hijacking school curricula and making the planet dumber

Bam!

so teaching people that they should be peaceful and forgive trespasses is dumb?

don't need to hand out bibles to do that.

how often have you done it?

everyday.

Yes, your "tolerance" for people who have different views is off the hook!

I'm tolerant of people believing what they want to believe. Not so tolerant when they start voting to limit people's rights using the bible as their basis, or when they teach fairy tales as facts in schools.

 

[jdoggydogg]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

Dawkins says that we must face the possibility that some aspects of the universe will always be unknowable. But it's important to remember that lack of scientific evidence does not further the possibility of a fantastic, god-like event.

This answer is pretty solid:

The most commonly asked question concerning the Big Bang Theory is - "what caused it? What was before the Big Bang?"

The honest answer - which is commonly provided within this forum - is that we do not know. The theory itself simply does not address anything prior to the Big Bang event. In fact, it is fairly clear that - since time and space are intimately connected - as determined by Dr Einstein over 100 years ago - in fact both time and space were originated by the event. This would mean that time did not exist prior to the Big Bang. Mathematically speaking, this makes perfect sense. Intuitively, it is difficult to comprehend. It means that there is no point in discussing what occurred before the Big Bang, because there is no such thing as "before" the Big Bang - at least in terms that can be easily described.

The second most commonly asked question regarding the Big Bang is - "How can something come from nothing?" Well, without making any claims that this is in fact what occurred, we know that something comes from nothing all the time at the quantum level of reality. If something was not constantly coming from nothing down there among the electrons and the quarks, then your computer would not function. On the average, mass / energy are conserved. On an individual quantum basis, that rule sorta fades away with the rest of the quantum weirdness that takes place all the time, although we cannot see it happening. If this stuff was easy, we would all be nuclear physicists.

 

[joffer]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

a) quantum physics has some interesting hypotheses. Is it so hard to say we don't know yet?b) see a)

c) see b)

d) see c)

I'd suggest A Universe from Nothing by Lawrence Krauss.

The world was flat, then we discovered it wasn't

The universe was static and eternal, now we know it isn't

We couldn't explain bio-diversity, now we can.

Science doesn't abhor mysteries, it embraces them.

 

[tonydead]

Isn't there a way to use DNA to determine if native americans are descended from isrealites? I mean, we're all related in some way, but can't we trace lineage somehow?

Smart guys? Can we debunk this Mormon hooey?

Yes, and it has been done. There is zero evidence that native Americans are descendants from Israelites from 2600 years ago like the book of Mormon claims. The overwhelming evidence points to native Americans being descendants from Asians. More specifically Siberians that crossed the bearing straights approximately 12000 years ago. You can find a lot of this evidence just by Googling.

There are also a ton of flaws in the book of Mormon that point to it being plagiarized and made up. Revisions have been made to the most correct book on earth since revision one to accommodate some of it's errors. I've read that they were planning to make subtle changes to blend with the recent DNA research, but, I haven't checked to see if they have been made yet.

 

[Sabertooth]

I have no problem saying we don't know. I don't know what was there before the Big Bang. But just because there was a Big Bang doesn't mean there isn't a supreme being.

 

[DrJ]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

There's a lot of questions between there and here as well. How did inanimate matter become life? The most simple form of life is extremely complex.

I don't believe in God. But the current scientific explanations require some pretty gigantic leaps in faith, so I'm not as comfortable in dismissing the existence of an entity of this sort as I was 20 years ago.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

a) quantum physics has some interesting hypotheses. Is it so hard to say we don't know yet?b) see a)

c) see b)

d) see c)

I'd suggest A Universe from Nothing by Lawrence Krauss.

The world was flat, then we discovered it wasn't

The universe was static and eternal, now we know it isn't

We couldn't explain bio-diversity, now we can.

Science doesn't abhor mysteries, it embraces them.

This is the difference between scientific thinking and religious thinking:

Science: We really don't know the answer to this mystery....YET. So we're going to keep looking until we do find an answer.

Religion: We really don't know the answer to this mystery so it must be the work of God!

 

[tonydead]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

Science isn't the beginning, it explains the beginning without requiring faith.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

There's a lot of questions between there and here as well. How did inanimate matter become life? The most simple form of life is extremely complex.

I don't believe in God. But the current scientific explanations require some pretty gigantic leaps in faith, so I'm not as comfortable in dismissing the existence of an entity of this sort as I was 20 years ago.

No they don't.

 

[LinusMarr]

I'm as atheist as anyone in here, but going around starting debates with kids who are handing out bibles seems like a pretty dbag move. It's not like they're picketing someone's funeral.

No they're just hijacking school curricula and making the planet dumber

Bam!

so teaching people that they should be peaceful and forgive trespasses is dumb?

don't need to hand out bibles to do that.

how often have you done it?

everyday.

Yes, your "tolerance" for people who have different views is off the hook!

I'm tolerant of people believing what they want to believe. Not so tolerant when they start voting to limit people's rights using the bible as their basis, or when they teach fairy tales as facts in schools.

Basically what you are saying is you are a "its my way or the highway" type of guy. Good for you...

 

[tonydead]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

There's a lot of questions between there and here as well. How did inanimate matter become life? The most simple form of life is extremely complex.

I don't believe in God. But the current scientific explanations require some pretty gigantic leaps in faith, so I'm not as comfortable in dismissing the existence of an entity of this sort as I was 20 years ago.

Existence of an "entity" is the ultimate leap in faith, no? Scientific theory is either proven or disproven, it doesn't require faith.

 

[Scoresman]

I'm as atheist as anyone in here, but going around starting debates with kids who are handing out bibles seems like a pretty dbag move. It's not like they're picketing someone's funeral.

No they're just hijacking school curricula and making the planet dumber

Bam!

so teaching people that they should be peaceful and forgive trespasses is dumb?

don't need to hand out bibles to do that.

how often have you done it?

everyday.

Yes, your "tolerance" for people who have different views is off the hook!

I'm tolerant of people believing what they want to believe. Not so tolerant when they start voting to limit people's rights using the bible as their basis, or when they teach fairy tales as facts in schools.

Basically what you are saying is you are a "its my way or the highway" type of guy. Good for you...

I am, but that has nothing to do with my views on religion.

 

[Sabertooth]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

Science isn't the beginning, it explains the beginning without requiring faith.

how does it not require faith?

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

I can't decide if I'm sad or amazed we are having this debate still in the year 2014. I wish I lived far enough into the future where these people become marginalized. I doubt society ever rids itself of them but over time it will get better (unless of course that imaginary guy up in the sky does something to show himself to everyone).

The debate will continue forever until science offers a better explanation that "if you have enough monkeys and enough typewriters..."

 

[Sabertooth]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

There's a lot of questions between there and here as well. How did inanimate matter become life? The most simple form of life is extremely complex.I don't believe in God. But the current scientific explanations require some pretty gigantic leaps in faith, so I'm not as comfortable in dismissing the existence of an entity of this sort as I was 20 years ago.

Existence of an "entity" is the ultimate leap in faith, no? Scientific theory is either proven or disproven, it doesn't require faith.

sure it requires faith. When was the Big Bang recreated to prove it? It's a theory right? Put forth by a being with great intelligence?

 

[DrJ]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

a) quantum physics has some interesting hypotheses. Is it so hard to say we don't know yet?b) see a)

c) see b)

d) see c)I'd suggest A Universe from Nothing by Lawrence Krauss.

The world was flat, then we discovered it wasn't

The universe was static and eternal, now we know it isn't

We couldn't explain bio-diversity, now we can.

Science doesn't abhor mysteries, it embraces them.

This is the difference between scientific thinking and religious thinking:

Science: We really don't know the answer to this mystery....YET. So we're going to keep looking until we do find an answer.

Religion: We really don't know the answer to this mystery so it must be the work of God!

Ruling out one possible explanation without concrete evidence to support it isn't exactly scientific, but this is what many people who supposedly use "scientific thought" do today.

 

[matuski]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

Science isn't the beginning, it explains the beginning without requiring faith.

how does it not require faith?

There are different degrees of faith. The "all of the evidence we have points to X" kind of faith, and then there is the "I don't know so it must have been an invisible dude in clouds" kind of faith.

 

[DrJ]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

There's a lot of questions between there and here as well. How did inanimate matter become life? The most simple form of life is extremely complex.

I don't believe in God. But the current scientific explanations require some pretty gigantic leaps in faith, so I'm not as comfortable in dismissing the existence of an entity of this sort as I was 20 years ago.

Existence of an "entity" is the ultimate leap in faith, no? Scientific theory is either proven or disproven, it doesn't require faith.

Ruling out the existence of said entity without concrete evidence to support it is a complete leap of faith.

 

[joffer]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

a) quantum physics has some interesting hypotheses. Is it so hard to say we don't know yet?b) see a)

c) see b)

d) see c)I'd suggest A Universe from Nothing by Lawrence Krauss.

The world was flat, then we discovered it wasn't

The universe was static and eternal, now we know it isn't

We couldn't explain bio-diversity, now we can.

Science doesn't abhor mysteries, it embraces them.

This is the difference between scientific thinking and religious thinking:

Science: We really don't know the answer to this mystery....YET. So we're going to keep looking until we do find an answer.

Religion: We really don't know the answer to this mystery so it must be the work of God!

Ruling out one possible explanation without concrete evidence to support it isn't exactly scientific, but this is what many people who supposedly use "scientific thought" do today.

Wat

 

[Scoresman]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

There's a lot of questions between there and here as well. How did inanimate matter become life? The most simple form of life is extremely complex.I don't believe in God. But the current scientific explanations require some pretty gigantic leaps in faith, so I'm not as comfortable in dismissing the existence of an entity of this sort as I was 20 years ago.

Existence of an "entity" is the ultimate leap in faith, no? Scientific theory is either proven or disproven, it doesn't require faith.

sure it requires faith. When was the Big Bang recreated to prove it? It's a theory right? Put forth by a being with great intelligence?

http://zeenews.india.com/news/space/scientists-recreate-big-bang-in-lab_873787.html

 

[Sabertooth]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

Science isn't the beginning, it explains the beginning without requiring faith.

how does it not require faith?

There are different degrees of faith. The "all of the evidence we have points to X" kind of faith, and then there is the "I don't know so it must have been an invisible dude in clouds" kind of faith.

I can agree with that.

 

[DrJ]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

a) quantum physics has some interesting hypotheses. Is it so hard to say we don't know yet?b) see a)

c) see b)

d) see c)I'd suggest A Universe from Nothing by Lawrence Krauss.

The world was flat, then we discovered it wasn't

The universe was static and eternal, now we know it isn't

We couldn't explain bio-diversity, now we can.

Science doesn't abhor mysteries, it embraces them.

This is the difference between scientific thinking and religious thinking:

Science: We really don't know the answer to this mystery....YET. So we're going to keep looking until we do find an answer.

Religion: We really don't know the answer to this mystery so it must be the work of God!

Ruling out one possible explanation without concrete evidence to support it isn't exactly scientific, but this is what many people who supposedly use "scientific thought" do today.

Wat

How can you prove that God doesn't exist and didn't have a hand in creating the universe and life?

 

[Yankee23Fan]

I just want to make sure I am clear on this…Ham and Creationists for the most part believe the Earth is about 6,000 years old, how do they explain the dinosaurs? We KNOW they date bad millions of years, science proves it so how do they get around that tough issue?

The dinosaurs were actually alien clones sent here to terraform the planet for their own needs. A few guys with sticks and rocks killed them, and then they came back a few years ago and we built these big mecha things to kill them once at for all.

 

[DrJ]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

Science isn't the beginning, it explains the beginning without requiring faith.

how does it not require faith?

There are different degrees of faith. The "all of the evidence we have points to X" kind of faith, and then there is the "I don't know so it must have been an invisible dude in clouds" kind of faith.

But we don't have any real evidence on how matter became life. Just a bunch of wild guesses.

 

[joffer]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

a) quantum physics has some interesting hypotheses. Is it so hard to say we don't know yet?b) see a)

c) see b)

d) see c)I'd suggest A Universe from Nothing by Lawrence Krauss.

The world was flat, then we discovered it wasn't

The universe was static and eternal, now we know it isn't

We couldn't explain bio-diversity, now we can.

Science doesn't abhor mysteries, it embraces them.

This is the difference between scientific thinking and religious thinking:

Science: We really don't know the answer to this mystery....YET. So we're going to keep looking until we do find an answer.

Religion: We really don't know the answer to this mystery so it must be the work of God!

Ruling out one possible explanation without concrete evidence to support it isn't exactly scientific, but this is what many people who supposedly use "scientific thought" do today.

Wat

How can you prove that God doesn't exist and didn't have a hand in creating the universe and life?

You can't. What do I win?Are you under the impression that Science has claimed to prove that god doesn't exist?

 

[joffer]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

Science isn't the beginning, it explains the beginning without requiring faith.

how does it not require faith?

There are different degrees of faith. The "all of the evidence we have points to X" kind of faith, and then there is the "I don't know so it must have been an invisible dude in clouds" kind of faith.

But we don't have any real evidence on how matter became life. Just a bunch of wild guesses.

Correct. What Science doesn't do is fill in what it can't explain yet with the supernatural. That's an argument from ignorance.

 

[DrJ]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

a) quantum physics has some interesting hypotheses. Is it so hard to say we don't know yet?b) see a)

c) see b)

d) see c)I'd suggest A Universe from Nothing by Lawrence Krauss.

The world was flat, then we discovered it wasn't

The universe was static and eternal, now we know it isn't

We couldn't explain bio-diversity, now we can.

Science doesn't abhor mysteries, it embraces them.

This is the difference between scientific thinking and religious thinking:

Science: We really don't know the answer to this mystery....YET. So we're going to keep looking until we do find an answer.

Religion: We really don't know the answer to this mystery so it must be the work of God!

Ruling out one possible explanation without concrete evidence to support it isn't exactly scientific, but this is what many people who supposedly use "scientific thought" do today.

Wat

How can you prove that God doesn't exist and didn't have a hand in creating the universe and life?

You can't. What do I win?Are you under the impression that Science has claimed to prove that god doesn't exist?

No, but I'm under the impression that a lot of people will suggest their lack of religious belief owes itself to "scientific thought".

 

[DrJ]

The problem I have with science is the beginning. How can something be made of nothing. How did the universe originate? You can't make something from nothing, can you? How did matter originate?

Science isn't the beginning, it explains the beginning without requiring faith.

how does it not require faith?

There are different degrees of faith. The "all of the evidence we have points to X" kind of faith, and then there is the "I don't know so it must have been an invisible dude in clouds" kind of faith.

But we don't have any real evidence on how matter became life. Just a bunch of wild guesses.

Correct. What Science doesn't do is fill in what it can't explain yet with the supernatural. That's an argument from ignorance.

No, instead they fill in the gaps with "the power of infinity".

 

[joffer]

No, but I'm under the impression that a lot of people will suggest their lack of religious belief owes itself to "scientific thought".

I'm sure there are some that have been led away from religion by Science continuing to fill in more of the "how we got here" story. So? Why does the puzzle have to be 100% complete before coming to the realization that the supernatural isn't necessary?

 

[DrJ]

No, but I'm under the impression that a lot of people will suggest their lack of religious belief owes itself to "scientific thought".

I'm sure there are some that have been led away from religion by Science continuing to fill in more of the "how we got here" story. So? Why does the puzzle have to be 100% complete before coming to the realization that the supernatural isn't necessary?

Science hasn't filled in the how we got here story. It's about 0% complete on that.