Have you seen an electron?

Is science observable and provable to those that are trained in that field? Yes.

But to the average person belief in many scientific items such as electrons is really no different from religious faith, love or aliens. Sure than can be proof presented but they are not really able to determine if its real such as an electron or fake like cold fusion. They take it on faith because someone that should know better said its true.

first of all, there are EXTREMELY strong microscopes in certain laboratories which can get an image of atoms (blurry images), and the heat-based coloration distinguishes certain parts.

Now a belief in sciences is superior on the basis that it can be tested. Science can be used to experiment. There are many different types of science and they are all related. With science there is an observation, and then many tests using previous knowledge, both of the sort we can see with the naked eye and with sorts that we cannot.

Religion on the other hand, cannot be tested. You cannot test for the existence of a deity, heaven, or hell (or whatever other places of reward/punishment exist in non-Judeo-Christian religions). The only supposed evidence of the judeo-christian god is the bible. But the bible is the claim. The hypothesis is that the bible tells the truth. People use the bible to prove the bible, which is invalid.

Now even with items that cannot be physically observed, there exists hundreds of years' worth of other sciences that are applied.

In fact, there do exist many biblical claims have been shown to be false. Among them is a that a city in Lebanon (i forget which) was forever destroyed. Yet today it is a functioning city. Or perhaps the biblical claim of earth's age. The bible claims the Earth to be about 6000 years old, yet there exists fossil evidence, geological evidence, DNA evidence, and other biological evidence of earth being exponentially older.

The main point I am making is that scientific ideas can be observed, questioned, tested, proven (or disproven), and conclusions can be made from them. And then that science can be applied to another observation.

The bible (or other religious text) can be observed. but then religion teaches not to question it. then there are no tests to confirm the existence of the divine being(s) described (yet the religious community claims that the biblical claim IS the proof, which it cannot be for reasons i explained above), and then there are no conclusions that can be made.

I have not looked directly through the microscope but i HAVE seen the images in several textbooks, written by experts who have. IMAGES. EVIDENCE. Do YOU have evidence of a god? Can you make any observation that leads to evidence of a God?

Further, I can ask you the same basic question. Did you witness Jesus get resurrected? Did you see the dead sea parting? If you didn't then you are committing the same mistake of following what is written in a book without seeing it for yourself. Except you do not have images to prove that those things happened. With those microscopes, there IS evidence.

You want proof of what I personally observed? OK! 10th grade chemistry lab, in which we put some liquids into fire from a bunsen burner. the lab informed us an approximate color range we would see (info given from experts who did a similar experiment. So indeed I tried, and all the colors observed were as described. The experiment was repeated and remained true.

If we were to wipe out all traces of science and of religion and then the human race was to recreate the such, scientific concepts will eventually be the same (or very close) to what we know now. Religious ideas will not be similar

Because there is evidence for electrons. There is more way to prove the existence of particals then sight. We can measure electrons, explain how they work, and even create devices that observe them and make them visible. However, there is NO evidence for god.

Because the concepts you learn in chemistry prove their existence indirectly.

But basic chemistry is probably too much for you, so god probably did it.

edit: I'm not even in college yet... lol, I also didn't mean to insult you, i thought you said electrons didn't exist. BUT I do not agree with you on God possibly existing, because there isn't any indirect proof that he exists. We don't have to see him that is true, but there still needs to be proof.

The key difference is evidence. I understand the evidence for quantum mechanics etc. but I see no evidence for the supernatural.

Yes, I'm friends with one. Sometimes I ask him to make some sparks for me when I touch the door handle and he listens to me.

Who else read this as "erection"?

facehoof