Ah! But you assume too much!
When I was young, I saw "something" and so did my brother ... and though we saw differences, we also saw similarities ... religious as I was in my later years, I proclaimed it a demon; but I no longer believe in such things ... all the elements of a "shared hallucination" are absent, and "power of suggestion" does not adequately explain the phenomenon as we never discussed this until I was in my adulthood.
In my adulthood, during a period of inner turmoil, scribbling furiously on a piece of paper with a lead pencil, I sat the pencil down and it rolled ... yet the surface was flat, there was no breeze, there was no slant in the table ... yet it rolled, predictably and repeatably ... other pencils, which seemed indistinguishable from this one, did not ... yet this one did ...
The last poignant example is feeling an overwhelming sensation that my birth mother was nearby ... I was 14 and had been separated from her for 7 years ... she felt the same sensation and expressed it to her husband while they were miles away from us ... Later, after we were reunited, we started talking consistently, and at times, I would pick up the phone before it rang and just say, "Hi, Momma" ....
Evidence is lacking to explain this phenomenon. No scientific explanation satisfies me in addressing them (and I tend to be very analytical). I no longer choose to juxtapose unprovable assertions, such as poltergeists, demons, ghosts, spirit, supernatural, etc. into these phenomenon; as there is no evidence that such things exist. So until there is evidence or explanation supported by evidence to explain these phenomenon, the answer to HOW, WTF is ... "I don't know".
But these kinds of "can't happen" experiences are not on the same level as the ceasing of planetary motions (which would cause otherwise stable and predictable mathematical algorithms to be "wrong") or a World Wide Flood (which would leave massive evidence, of which there is none) or a great Exodus (of which there lacks not only physical evidence, but the mysterious lack of the mention of such a massive slave revolt in Egyptian history and hieroglyphs).
Being open to possibilities while there is lack of evidence to the contrary is one thing. Being open to possiblities when there is abundant evidence to the contrary is another altogether.
So, can science disprove that I was visited by a demon, that pencils roll by themselves or that humans have perceptions beyond what science can clinically reproduce or explain, or show us what was before the Big Bang?
Okay ... No, at least not yet; and maybe never so. So from that perspective, possibly science can never disprove Or prove) these religious beliefs, be they true OR false ... But again (and I'm repeating myself, so this shall be my last post in this thread), it can certainly disprove religious beliefs when they trample on what science knows to be true; and what science knows to be UNtrue.
"So, can science disprove that I was visited by a demon, that pencils roll by themselves or that humans have perceptions beyond what science can clinically reproduce or explain, or show us what was before the Big Bang?"
Just some thoughts....
Science can more easily prove that which happens materially than it can prove that which happens when the material is affected by decision, psychology, etc. (which need not be based on any logic, and so can be truly random) -and even proving the material becomes more difficult when interactions become more complex.
Evidence for what happened before the Big Bang is literally everywhere -and though it was a massive event, it produced an extreme number of very similar things which are likely made of the same stuff which has always existed. Those things also behave predictably unless decision becomes a factor. It may actually be easier to prove than a much more recent flood.
It may also be more difficult to prove that which happened after the Big Bang, as an extreme number of interactions increased complexity.
Once one gets to Mars, for example, it might be easier to find evidence of water or life on Mars than to figure out who ate the Mars bar out of your candy stash.
When considering THE biblical flood, one must consider many things. The existence of God, the ability of God, the psychology of God, the imperfect language used in having the account recorded, whether it was recorded at the time, whether it is a complete account, related activities of God not recorded, etc., etc.
For example.... If God intended for man to "subdue the earth", he might have done other things relating to life forms which would sustain man.
So......... if we focus on one major point alone -simply (?) the entire earth flooding and the effects on the surface of the earth alone -which would include a die-off of some life forms...
Then we consider the type of flooding described -and assume enough water and the lowest possible intensity.... Because strong rain and soft rain would leave somewhat different evidence..... uniform rain on all of the earth rather than localized violent storms in many places ...water rising from beneath the earth steadily ....
The evidence of such could be different than what has been assumed before. For example.... Things would not necessarily have moved great distances, evidence would not be of violent flooding, etc., etc., .... like the difference between a misty sprinkler and a poured bucket of water.
So.... If we look for
only many dead things and sustained wetness which receded fairly slowly -and may have happened non-violently -in the given time frame..... it might be easier and more accurate.
