Science has not proved the nonexistence of God, and it may be that it is incapable of doing so.

Which is not to say that God must or even probably exists. It means that science can't disprove that existence.

"Well," you say,"science can't disprove the existence of jet-propelled unicorns either. The idea of 'God' is similar." Very true. But the distinction is that I am the only person who believes in jet-propelled unicorns (and I don't mean to believe much beyond the end of this message), but belief in God or gods has been a nearly universal trait of the human mind. That, plus the fact that in its simplest form it does not conflict with scientific knowledge, gives it some presumption of credibility, though certainly at a very low level.

And by "simplest form" I mean the idea of a superintelligence that created everything but itself. All else one could say about such an entity is that It is extremely creative and powerful.

What It (if It exists) wants us to do about it (if anything), is up for grabs. That's where the wild conjecture and special pleading and religious slaughters come in.

Some will argue that perhaps the universe is God: eternal, superpowerful, and supercreative. ("Superintelligent" too, if intelligence is a purely material manifestation of physical laws dictated by the math that the universe seems to have dreamed up, if that's the right phrase.)

But at that point, since we don't know what, if anything, the universe wants us to do about it, it all becomes a pointless word game.