Science has the ability to address existence of god

I am afraid I made a minor mistake in how I crafted my presentation before, which would explain why some of Con's responses seem to be misguided or misdirected. So here it is briefly again. 1. Observations The observations I see would be Quantum flucuations and that's it. The present Null hypothesis regarding this phenomna is that these quantum particles pop in and out of existence from nothing (i.e. without a physical cause). 2. Why is there something rather than nothing? "This stage frequently involves finding and evaluating evidence from previous experiments, personal scientific observations or assertions, as well as the work of other scientists. If the answer is already known, a different question that builds on the evidence can be posed. When applying the scientific method to research, determining a good question can be very difficult and it will affect the outcome of the investigation." https://en.wikipedia.org... As mentioned before, The experiments show the existence of independent ideas that actually represent objective reality instead of Materialism. In other words, space-time, matter and energy is not all that there is. They also show how the "observer" who posseses a mind is the mechanism that can potentially make the transition from wave function to quantum fluctuations . Again, If the sources were too technical for everyone to accept my argument and evidence, Please rely on the consensus view on this subject: A 2013 poll showed that most quantum physicists believe that the observer plays a fundamental role in the practical application of mathematical formulas and they believe these formulas ontologically exist in a objective way. Just read question 9 and 10: https://archive.org... Operational definitions The wave function: a spaceless timeless immaterial object, which represents a possible mathmatical configuration of a universe... The mind: a spaceless timeless immaterial cause, where there is no pre-existing antecedent physical cause that predetermines our decisions completely involuntarily all the time rather than simply influence our decisions. 3. The God Hypothesis According to the bible, God created us in his image. More importantly, John 1:1-3 says: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. The phrase "the Word" means "the Logos" in Greek and "Logic" in English. Logic comes in many forms, such as math and semantics. In addition, John 1:1 is in parallel with Genesis 1:1. If the God hypothesis is true, then it will explain several other observations. Explanatory power Consciousness and Awareness Since dark energy is consistent with general relativity and affects the expansion of the universe, then the cosmologic constant would apply to the smaller universes created within the regions of our universe as well. For example, the cosmological constant is placed at a precise measurement of 10 to the 120th power , and when scientists trace the expansion back one second after the Planck scale of our universe, the degree of precision becomes an astounding value of 10 to the 10 to the 123rd power. Hypothetically, this means that if our universe’s expansion rate had different values with larger amounts of dark energy, the sample size of those universes created in the expansion that try to clump together to form planets and stars would have most likely blown the cosmic material apart instead. If our universe’s expansion rate had different values with smaller amounts of dark energy, the sample size of those universes created in the expansion would have most likely collapse back into a singularity before it ever reached its present size. Thus, the right values could only have occurred if they were carefully chosen that way with full awareness of the consequences of not doing so. More importantly, these values essentially came into being the same moment the universe came into being and ,thus, had to be created by the same causal entity. Self-consciousness and Personal identity The genetic code within DNA carries inherent meaning and information that is communicated between us on a regular basis. For example, Church and Kosuri (2012) were able to create a biotech version of an e-reader, with the highest storage capacity to date. This involved encoding an entire book (along with illustrations) in DNA. The book consisted of 53,246 words, 11 JPG images, and even a ja vascript program [4]. Thus, Since there could not be any conscious life before simple life emerged, God would not only have to be the explanation for the DNA information but a personal being like us who has intrinsic desires to create life.[4] Church, G. M., Gao, Y. & Kosuri, S. (2012). Next-generation digital information storage in DNA. Science 337, 6102. Omni-potent, Omniscient and Omnipresence According to Eternal inflation, the expansion rate of the universe will continue to accelerate forever and create an endless amount of configured pocket universes within the black hole regions of our universe. These small regions (i.e. gravitational waves) that are created by inflation have a background radiation that is nearly the exact same temperature as the background radiation of other regions where their space-time curvature is evolving lock-step with ours, but separating apart from each other in all directions. This acceleration of the expansion from inflation is supposed to be produced from an explosion or collision of quantum fluctuations of particles called "dark energy" that permeate the entire universe where a billion (plus one) of positive particles and a billion of negative particles come into existence at once. Then, they annihilate each other out of existence, and the leftover positive particle creates a smaller universe and accelerates the expansion of our universe in the process. Finally, these quantum fluctuations emerge from a universal wave-function describing the totality of existence and extend out to infinity where each one represents a different possible configuration of matter or a universe. Thus, these observations demonstrates that this mind is causally active everywhere by expanding the universe in all directions using a quantum entanglement process (i.e. omnipresent). Moreover, it suggests that this mind knows every possible configuration of matter by creating every logically possible world eternally into the future from the universal wave-function (i.e. omniscience). Finally, it suggests that this mind has infinite power by using dark energy to accelerate our universe forever (i.e. omni-potent). For instance, in physics, power is the rate of doing work. It is the amount of energy consumed per unit time. As a physical concept, power requires both a change in the physical universe and a specified time in which the change occurs (wikipedia). 4. Predictions If the God hypothesis is false, then there is a conceivable world or universe where God does not have to exist or it's not necessary to explain it. Therefore, if a physicist crafts a model of a past-eternal universe and empirically tests and confirms it, then this would falsify my hypothesis. Sean Carrol himself has suggested how this would falsify the God hypothesis in this video: Con’s source of [7] in his round 2, is bafflingly ridiculous I was simply trying to give an additional source that would help everyone understand Source 8# better since quantum physics is a difficult subject to understand. Source 7# explains how the wave-function is non-physical and can be confirmed through a different approach, which source 8# empirically supports. Even more embarrassing is that Con has quote-mined a blog-piece from new Scientist [1]. Again, I was trying to help everyone understand the material I presented. This is why I also gave a source that provided the consensus view on these subjects just in case the material was still too complex to accept.Regardless of what Con says, we can differentiate between the natural and the supernatural. Let’s take an extremely famous legal case [4]. This goes over why Intelligent design is pseudo-science, and whilst you are not proposing Intelligent DesignA judge is not a valid source for Con to argue that my hypothesis is unscientific nor is a courtroom an appriopriate place to determine science. So this is clearly an appeal to authority fallacy.Furthermore, considering that science only deals with the explanation of natural phenomena, I’d say that this is very relevant to this debate.First off, science has essentially confirmed the existence of the supernatural in the case of the wave-function. Secondly, we don't have to have direct evidence for a cause of a phenomna in science, like in the case of nuetrinos. Indirect evidence from the effects for a cause is totally accepted in science and thus whether a cause is potentially supernatural or natural is not a problem, especially since the scientific method is inherently inductive. If you’re going to state that science can address the notion of a god, it would be in the scientific literature, regardless of it being a hypothesisIf this debate was titled "The God Hypothesis should be considered a Scientific theory", then I think Con would have a point since theories in science are accepted and well tested hypothesizes. This is not the case in this debate though, as I explained before. With that said, I will actually provide some evidence in the next round that suggests it is within the literature. P.S. remember I am Pro and you are Con so be sure to label me properly next time so the voters won't be confused.