Will science ever know everything?

 

These are all good quotes, but nothing suggests that any of this CANNOT be known, only that it is not known at the present time.

 

It would still be possible to envisage a future time when these questions have been answered.

Geeeee ... Einstein read THE BARDO?

The possibility of god or any kind of "supreme being"

Ufos and the possibility of alien life ever visiting this planet

Ghosts

Life after death/the after life (also past lives, future lives etc)

Big foot, lochness monster or any other unexplained phenomena

All I'm saying is that imo science does not and cannot explain everything. If you look back in history there was a time when people thought the earth was flat and that the sun revolved around the earth etc. Science has caught up to those things and it's likely it will catch up to other things we don't have scientific evidence for. I am a fan of science. I like science. However, I also try to keep an open mind with things.

^^  A lot of people who complain about science don't really understand it or the scientific method.  Science does not deal with proof, it deals with evidence and presents tentative models for better understanding how things work.

In science, it's about evidence as there is no proof (proof is used in logic, mathematics and law). It's not a closed system and every theory is open to questioning, adaptation or scrapping when new evidence comes to light. Science is about trying to understand how the universe works, but it shouldn't be making absolute truth claims as everything is open to reevaluation.  Hypotheses, theories and claims are provisional and tentative; they are subject to change.  One tries to present the best models. And the scientific method deals with that which is falsifiable, in other words that which could be proven "wrong". Of course I said In science there is no proof, but at the same time mathematics and logic are incorporated.   A less confusing way to put it might be to say "could be demonstrated"or "shown" rather than "proven" (rather too depends on what one means by proof, as well as what constitutes evidence, and wrong can be a tricky word...).

I don't believe anything with absolute certainty, and I prefer not to believe things without what I think are good reasons to believe in them.  I am a sceptic.  I don't claim to know what is possible or true in regards to many things.  I studied philosophy far more than science, and I like this from Plato, paraphrased, "The first step on the road to wisdom is the recognition of one's own ignorance."

Those who dismiss science because it can't answer everything, nor does it deal with everything, I think are rather missing the point and beauty of science.