Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc
So, you missed the entire thread topic yet again.
The current sub-thread is not about the BBT proving or disproving a deity. It's about why you refuse to treat it like any other scientific theory. If you disagree, please quote where I've stated in this thread that BBT disproves a deity. You are simply making a claim I've never made as though it somehow invalidates everything I've stated.
Unless, of course, you're going to claim that you think it somehow states that there can't be a deity, and that therefore you think it is not scientific. If that's the case, I will just again point out that this claim is erroneous, the theory itself makes no claim about deities, and that the BBT was initially proposed by a Catholic priest.
If that's not what you're claiming, then please explain why you feel the BBT cannot be provisionally accepted, and rejected in the future if necessary, like any other scientific theory has - including the ones like Newtonian physics that ran into data from observation and experimentation indicating they could not actually be true, and were actually rejected when a better, more explanatory theory that was supported by evidence and experimentation (just like Newtonian physics actually was, up until we found data that contradicted it) came along.