Again, science does NOT have FAITH in anything. It does not INVENT laws.It does not speculate about how many boxes are "there". It simply records results of experiment and derives logical rules this (and numerous other) experiments follow. And there is no God(s) or any of their signatures in the visible Universe, or in the way "the box" came to existence - pure math and nothing more.

Again, scientist doubts any faith - and he EXPERIMENTS to check ANYTHING, religion DOES NOT DOUBT, DOES NOT EXPERIMENT to check what is wrong and what is correct.

That is why religion is only popular among non-educated minds - especially those who do not know or do not understand how physical laws (well, actually mathematical) govern the behavior of subatomic particles, atoms, molecules, molecular clusters, cells, organs, organizms, groups of organozms, evolution, geological events, planets, stars, galaxies, group of galacies, visible Universe, space and time in it.

• Alexander, I must say you are over-stepping it here. - richard - February 2, 2001 - 23:04 UTC
  • Cristian brothers teaching physics? - alexander - February 3, 2001 - 00:55 UTC
    • Alexander, You know are rated at the level of Jisbond!!! - richard - February 3, 2001 - 03:14 UTC
      • Who cares about rating here? - alexander - February 3, 2001 - 04:06 UTC
        • a word to the wise, if i may - gwynj - February 3, 2001 - 21:50 UTC
          • Of course, it is easier to read Bible than to learn. - alexander - February 3, 2001 - 23:33 UTC
            • to clarify - gwynj - February 4, 2001 - 02:07 UTC
    • Oh, come on, now. - stormcrow - February 3, 2001 - 03:29 UTC
      • Adam and evolution? This is something new. - alexander - February 3, 2001 - 04:29 UTC
        • Re: Adam and evolution? This is something new. - stormcrow - February 3, 2001 - 04:35 UTC
          • Re: Re: Adam and evolution? This is something new. - alexander - February 3, 2001 - 05:32 UTC
            • Re: Re: Re: Adam and evolution? This is something new. - alexander - February 3, 2001 - 05:54 UTC
              • Re: Re: Re: Re: Adam and evolution? This is something new. - stormcrow - February 3, 2001 - 12:13 UTC
              • maybe if put this way - gwynj - February 3, 2001 - 16:33 UTC
                • Re: maybe if put this way - alexander - February 3, 2001 - 19:17 UTC
                  • Re: Re: maybe if put this way - gwynj - February 3, 2001 - 20:13 UTC
                    • Reading the Holy Bible, I found the following: - alexander - February 3, 2001 - 22:17 UTC
                      • Re: Reading the Holy Bible, I found the following: - gwynj - February 4, 2001 - 01:59 UTC
                        • Lack of knowledge is good? - alexander - February 4, 2001 - 03:29 UTC
                          • Let's start with The Basics, ok? - gwynj - February 4, 2001 - 14:39 UTC
• you might consider - gwynj - February 3, 2001 - 01:34 UTC
  • Re: you might consider - alexander - February 3, 2001 - 02:52 UTC
    • Nice Argument - stormcrow - February 3, 2001 - 03:13 UTC
      • Re: Nice Argument - blnelsonusa - February 5, 2001 - 13:52 UTC
    • Re: Re: you might consider - gwynj - February 3, 2001 - 15:57 UTC