I think this is a good video. Of course it is not a rigorous logical proof, but it is a good, commonsense video overall. I have no doubt that many religious people will not like it, but probably not be able to offer a sound refutation. Thoughts?
The problem ultimately is science can test the truth of everything, but itself. Ergo, it has an obvious failing in regard to being considered the source of the _absolute_ truth. It's perhaps content to say that science provides a relative truth (within the limits of our understanding), but there is always a gap (and probably always will be). However, if the truths it provides are relative then we simply are chasing a thread like a cat here. We must realize whatever we think we know it's all subject to change. If it were providing absolute truth then, of course, that wouldn't be possible.
That notwithstanding, materialistic observations are largely useless for proving the existence and non-existence of things. For example, you cannot detect thoughts and you presume gravity is there but we actually see nothing but secondary manifestations. No one here would deny either would exist and herein lies some of the dilemmas. It's a minor step from that to being able to scientifically explain religion, but it sees the manifestation and has no means to measure the cause.
