Okay, I’ll answer that, but let’s be clear up front that by “physical evidence”, we do not mean “scientific evidence” with respect to God. An alien from another planet is made of atoms — a physical entity — and therefore is subject to the rigors of a good scientific test. We might find scientific evidence, even if only on a microscopic level, to support or oppose a falsifiable hypothesis.
But physical evidence of a metaphysical deity must of necessity mean something different, since a metaphysical entity is not made of physical stuff like atoms. The only such physical evidence that we can examine is the sort I referenced earlier: evidence that can be construed either way. Much like Ramachandran’s comments about temporal lobe activity which, he says, can be used to argue for the existence of God as much as against it. (The reasoning, of course, is that you cannot determine whether the phenomenon you observe is God stimulating the limbic system, or the limbic system conjuring hallucinations of God. All you see is actvity.)
Okay. Well, as I often say, it really doesn’t matter whether God created mankind or even the universe for that matter. It all serves His purpose just the same.
No, science didn’t predict them. Scientists predicted them — with falsifiable hypotheses. Science is a testing method, not a prognostication system.
Well, you do make a prediction. But you aren’t science. (And please do me the courtesy of refraining from charges of nitpicking. It is important in these discussions to get these things right, and frame them properly. There’s plenty enough misunderstanding to go around without anthropomorphisms and hypostetizations. I’m just trying to be precise.)
