Fenn wrote:
"Science" cannot predict the weather 300 days from now.
"Science" cannot predict the weather 30 days from now.
"Science" has genuine trouble predicting the weather 3 days from now.
"Science" doesn't really know how the brain works.
"Science" cannot even tell me how my medication works: it comes with a piece of paper that says "the mechanism of action is unknown however it is thought that . . ."
"Science" has yet to come up with a grand unified theory. Some of the best theories require 10, 11 and 26 dimensions, if they were ever to work at all.
. . . for now.
I accept that "Science" is an ongoing process that eventually yields results.
I accept that "Science" has already discovered everything that is easiest to discover.
I accept that "Science" is all too slowly replacing the doctrines of Religion and the precepts of Superstition.
_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.