[who_would_fardels_bear]

Your notions sound disturbingly close to logical positivism, i.e. that something can only be possibly true if it is falsifiable through some experiment.

The logical positivists were about more than just trying to put science on a firm philosophical ground. They were also about relegating metaphysics and theology to the dustbin of history.

Notions that are unprovable scientifically, such as the existence of God, existence of souls, Christ's nature as both God and man, etc. would not pass muster with your logical positivist progenitors.

[Moseley]

Your notions sound disturbingly close to logical positivism, i.e. that something can only be possibly true if it is falsifiable through some experiment.

No, the issue is that science is not capable of addressing everything. Science has limits.

You don't use a screwdriver to hammer a nail.

When you use the tools of science, you have to understand what they can do and what they cannot do.

Your notions sound like, or actually state in roundabout ways, you believe that science can investigate EVERYTHING and there is no aspect of the universe or existence which will not surrender and succumb to the powers of science.

The point is that it is not science unless it can be falsifiable through some experiment.

I know that God created the universe, the Earth, and all life. But that does not mean that science is capable of addressing the question.

There are things that are true, but they are beyond the powers of science to consider one way or the other.

Not everything that is true is capable of being understood through science.