Oncet again, ad nauseum...

Science is a *process* of inquiry. This *process of inquiry* explains things in terms of currrently available data that can demonstrate *reproducible results.* If you do not *accept* science as such, then you are obliged to suggest another *process* that can can demonstrate *reproducible results.*

Religions are *belief systems.* One must have *faith* and not be concerned about the internal logic or whether the *beliefs* can lead to *reproducible results.* Because they cannot; they do not.

On *accepts* science; one *believes in* religion. It is a critical semantic distinction. It is definitional. It is not arguable.

Saul