Current status Hidden site now up at http://ydt6jy2ng3s3xg2e.onion/
No.10110068 ViewReplyOriginalReport
I just want to point out at first, that I do not disagree with sciences measurements and observations of physical reality. It's mostly tested, recreated, and peer reviewed. There's a solid foundation of reasoning to it backed by a theological structure that makes it do an excellent job in its domain.

Where I find disagreement is when people try and use science to fill the role of philosopher, attempting to explain our origins, meaning and purpose. That is not sciences domain. That domain belongs to something more abstract such as linguistics, philosophy and metaphysics.

People who believe wholly in hard science for those questions will have much difficulty forming a coherent world view without first crossing the borders. An example predicament question might be "prove that you exist" or logical paradoxes like "this statement is false". What's interesting to note is that science was built on a theoretical model to begin with.

This is where the CTMU comes in.