I really liked your answer, and was drawn to the comparison with phlogiston and aether (not the polka-dotted unicorns).
I think that's the PERFECT comparison. Those elements were thought up as WAYS to explain phenomena, as theories that made sense and in some cases were close enough to the 'real' thing (where the real things is the current theories, which are not so much 'truth' as 'much better models'). This is why theism isn't 'silly' as flemco is trying to state. It might be very very wrong, but it does attempt to explain something. It's not a spontaneous thought out of someone's head, it's a non-scientific theory that is easy to believe and that will remain strong until a scientific theory comes out that is stronger and understandable.
But this may never happen: We have a very VERY hard idea of grasping the relationship of time and space. The relationship only visibly appears in thought experiments and in scales much greater than our world. It is downright impossible (for now, I guess I should add) for us to get a third-person view of the Universe.
So all in all, it's nice to enlighten theists that the answer to "how did it all start" may be "perhaps it never did", but science is in no position to ridicule theist beliefs. It may be prudent for science to shut up and nod until science has a nice theory on the improbability of God existing.
no subject
I think that's the PERFECT comparison. Those elements were thought up as WAYS to explain phenomena, as theories that made sense and in some cases were close enough to the 'real' thing (where the real things is the current theories, which are not so much 'truth' as 'much better models'). This is why theism isn't 'silly' as flemco is trying to state. It might be very very wrong, but it does attempt to explain something. It's not a spontaneous thought out of someone's head, it's a non-scientific theory that is easy to believe and that will remain strong until a scientific theory comes out that is stronger and understandable.
But this may never happen: We have a very VERY hard idea of grasping the relationship of time and space. The relationship only visibly appears in thought experiments and in scales much greater than our world. It is downright impossible (for now, I guess I should add) for us to get a third-person view of the Universe.
So all in all, it's nice to enlighten theists that the answer to "how did it all start" may be "perhaps it never did", but science is in no position to ridicule theist beliefs. It may be prudent for science to shut up and nod until science has a nice theory on the improbability of God existing.