I have been reading a science book called HISTORICAL GEOLOGY, EVOLUTION OF EARTH AND LIFE THROUGH TIME. by Reed Wicander and James S. Monroe. i have seen this book in my old high school. Not one that was tought out of but in the library. this is not in the book, but listen to Carl Sagans thoughts. "Where did God come from. If we decide this is an unanswerable question, why dont we just save a step and include the origin of the universe is an unanswerable question. or, if we say God always existed, why not save a step and say the universe always existed"? first, i would just like to say, if scientists say, they will not allow the supernatural into science, why go and make truth claims about it. if scientists are saying you are not allowed to bring your religions into our schools to be tested as a possibility, then how do they get the right to make truth claims about those religions. they dont let the religions share answers and work with them and then tell everyone they have no answers, well maybe because they limmit creationists possibilities to examine? i know this sounds bias of me, ha, its just resentment. now resentments aside, i want to ask a few questions. "science must proceed without any appeal to beliefs or supernatural explanations, not because such beliefs or explanattions are necessarily untrue, but because we have no way to investigate them. for this reason science makes up no claim about the existence or nonexistence of a supernatural or spiritual realm". ok, i can understand that IF there is no way to investiigate the supernatural(wich is a diffrent topic but i am fully convinced you can study the supernatural, and it would be the same way as science finds a lot of there answers) then not to allow it into science. but even they themselves say that theres the possibility that those are not neccessarily untrue. therefore stands my question. if there is a possibility, that there might have been or is a supernatural process should it not always be allowed for examineing into science. lets say that there is a supernatural proccess that has occured. lets say that there was a God who created the universe. Would that not clash with evolutions theory of the begining? therefore should not the supernatural be examined? If you limmit every possibilty down to one does not mean that one is right. but if you limmit every possibility by lack of evidence then that one may be or at least the closest to being right. i dont belive that evolution can ever be right unless they examine the supernatural and prove the supernatural is not needed. and while the evolution theory is just a theory, and fact as some of you say, should it be taught in school it is right, or the closest to right? no, ist not more right then anything else because they just dont allow anything else. sorry for going out of order, but if evolution wants to be correct they have to honestly disprove all other possibilities. and if you say they have already disproved the supernatural i must disagree and they have in this geology book. look at the statement above. people say that science is not about finding all the truth. i have to disagree. why else would we study unless we want to find answers?