Evidence for God from Science

PandasThumb posted this article:

http://www.pandasthumb.org/pt-archives/001046.html

How would you respond to this?

I would have two comments:

1.) God probably does work through natural means when it comes to the weather.
2.) Many of the passages could refer to divine intervention regarding the weather, which is the exception rather than the rule.

How would you respond?

I don't know what the author considers science to be, but as I read the first sentence I straight away had disagreements: "In a recent post, I noted in passing that modern evolutionary theory is no more atheistic than other sciences that seek natural explanations for the natural world."

Firstly, it is irrelevent whether "evolution" is atheistic or not. What matters are the facts, and whether evolution best explains those facts. And I put forward that without any known natural mechanism for large-scale evolutionary changes which require new information content, that one is being quite natural in assuming an intelligent agent behind the creation of life.

I have an additional beef with these "other sciences"? Does he mean other sciences like archaeology, forensics, anthropology, or even something like the SETI experiment. I'm assuming these are still science even though much of what is studied looks to an intelligent agent as the cause rather than a natural one. So what is the problem with trying to apply the same principles to biology? I'll tell you what it is —Philosophical Materialism disguised as "Science."

Kurieuo.

You shouldn't be surprised to see PandasThumb advocating evolution. Their sole, express purpose is to defend evolutionism against creationism and intelligent design.

What I was wondering is how you would interpret the passages saying that God controlled the weather. Was something supernatural going on, or are we seeing God working through nature?

Yeah I know, but I still thought it good to point out some closed thinking.

As for the weather and so on, I don't see a problem with assuming God controls it. I think we don't ever really know the cause, but rather we come to understand causation that is repeated through observations and develop laws that best explain them. The fact that laws of physics and so forth can be used to explain much, only reveals for Theists that God likes to work within a stable, predictable environment. If designs reveal anything about the designer, perhaps this says to us that God isn't whimsical or capricious, but that God is stable and can be trusted.

Kurieuo.