[Skolem]

Hi, I just beginn to read this post, but the topic is so near to my occupation, that I have to reply.
Arryn, are you trying to state, that "hard science (physic, chemistry and biology)" are more thrustworthy than religion, because they have hard proof of what they say?
IIRC this science are experimental, they state things, and prove them by testing them. How can you say that if something was thousand times observed it will function that way?
Actually I believe science wouldn't pass your religion test, as you believe in them having no proof for their truth, as did people believes in other religion.
Well will you say, but there is still mathematics, they don't rely on experiments, they are pure logic!
First, who say that the logical assumpitions we made are correct?
For exemple tertium non datur is highly debatable, as are other logical assumptions. And Last but not least, there is still the good, old, mighty Gödel argument, If you can prove me the consistency (that is the fact that a theory can not produce contradiction) of a theory, that can do simple arithmetic (you really dont need a lot, only something like non commutative additions of natural numbers) then I can prove you that your theory is inconsistent. What does this mean, it means that at best mathematicians can only know that they haven't any contradiction now, but they can never be sure that one can not arrive.
So you are saying you believe in something, who can prove , that it can't prove that it is correct. Well to believe in this (every mathematician does it), is for me the very same kind of faith act as to believe in a given religion, that is why so many Mathematician, and to a further extend Physician, believes in God (He has to make maths correct...!!!)
Skolem