Well, my only claim in this debate, actually, is that I don't like when science is said to be in opposition to god or spirituality. I think that it's a very counter-productive argument that only creates more division between people.
Which is why, in science, one person's claims are never taken as truth until they have been independently verified by others.
Yes, but can you truly prove, to yourself, that all those independently verifications you get by other scientists are actually comming from real people and not just imaginary scientists that live inside your crazed mind having a very vivid dream?
In fact, how do you even know if your brain is in reality stored in a scientist's jar inside a strange frankenstein-lab heavily sedated with huge dozes of extreme medication kept functional by electricity?
Ok, seriously, I'm obviously putting it on the edge here, but there is a line of philosophy that actually deals with this problem:
Solipsism.
In short it says something along these lines:
In the entire existance, I am only truly evidently aware of 1 thinking being; myself. I cannot prove that any other thinking being exist. Even though it may seem like all observable humans have the capacity of thought, there is always a greater-than-zero possibility that they, and even all else that I observe and perceive as reality, are just figments of my own imagination created by my own mind, which therefore leaves me with the ever-present possibility that MY mind is all that exists.
So to put that into the context of this debate; whether you observe god, or the atoms making up a human being, the observation is still YOURS only. Thus all, except the existance of your own thoughts, is something you either believe in or don't believe in.
You can't question the existance of your thoughts, if you have them, but you can always question their content.
