Response To https://twitter.com/Tweeting_Reason/status/742676805702799361

I'm not sure that God as a scientifically-verified theory is the goal. My understanding of general consensus seems to be that there are multiple aspects of apparently accepted reality that science is unable to verify and test, such as black holes. The proposed source of all reality, including apparently unscientifically verifiable reality such as black holes, seems reasonably suggested to exist beyond the current verification and testability of human perception, even when aided by humanly-developed technology.

Perhaps accordingly, the basis for the proposed substantiation is not a new proposed observation that needs to be scientifically vetted, but seems to be apparently overlooked, yet most logical implications of already scientifically vetted observations, perhaps similarly to the way that the Law Of Conservation Of Mass seems to be the most logical implication of the Law Of Conservation Of Energy and Mass/Energy Equivalence (E=mc2). To me, as many times as one tests the logic of their confluence, the Law Of Conservation Of Mass seems to be the outcome. To me, the extent to which the Law Of Conservation Of Mass is also within the realm of scientific sensory verification seems to have lent it its own space in the scientific organon.

To me thus far, the SIDP presentation's proposed logical implications seem similarly, as readily, and as repeatedly tested with the same logically-derived results reached at each testing. If a reasoning flaw is identified or an equally likely or more likely logical outcome is identified and substantiated, then, perhaps, perhaps the proposal does not present the most logical implications of science's findings, otherwise, the proposal seems.

To me, the same seems appropriately suggested regarding the theory of evolution. To me, regardless of the number of fossils, fossil age calculations, pedigreed fossil and fossil age analysts, and fossil form similarities that are identified and proposed, the evolution of humans from single-celled organism seems incapable of being scientifically verified, since it seems appropriately categorized as a past event, and therefore beyond the scope of any scientific, observation-based test. The only aspect of the human evolution proposition that can be scientifically tested is the logical estimation processes via which the proposed conclusions have been drawn. To me, the logical estimation process that logically yields the Law Of Conservation Of Mass, and that yields the theory of evolution from otherwise inconclusive observation of physical evidence, seems to comprise the SIDP presentation. The apparent lack of a substantiated reasoning flaw in the SIDP presentation, or a stronger reasoning alternative seems to render the presentation not to have been debunked.