Some fundamental things are discussed here by all persuasions.
However rationality is lauded over imagination, observation over perception, and logic over inanity.
It is as if we must all conform to a single Truth even if that Truth is a lie.
The scienific method is empirical, but being a method it serves as an admirable tool to all of any persuasion who care to use it. What the scientific method does not prescribe or proscribe is the interpretation of the result obtained by its use.
Thus like Newton we may still believe god orders and maintains the universe through angelic administrations no matter how accurate our observations.
Or like Dawkins we may believe in the inherent self administration of the universe, with no God being necessary.
One make these perceptions in varying states of awareness and consciousness, never giving full credit to the interconnected web of dependencies that flow through ones individual subjective and objective understanding, and apprehension.
To talk of time as though it existed in a different way say to water is to unilaterally miss the contribution one makes to the perception itself.
Normally one assumes, by education that light travels in a straight line. but having accepted that idea one does not then question how light bends, or even consider the implications of light "bending" as commonly described.
When one begins the process one obsrves the shifting sands of compromise,ellipsis, obfuscation,bending and general gerrymandering that goes on in constructing a sentence to even describe an empirical experience, and the reliance on hope that exists as a teacher attempts to show a student what he/she has observed.
Ones own views and experiences will never be totally understood by a community of scientists, historians,street gang, or any other conglomeration of animates.
One ha to make do with approximations.
Fundamentally motion is all we have and the observer of motion. From this coupling we may devise all else in our universe.
