I'd say you hit the nail on the head with repeatability. But when you're studying the supernatural, what you're looking for is the lack of repeatability. There must be some proof that the laws of nature is at some point inconsistent. Which is admittedly hard, and we've quite a bit to go before having consistent theories that cover everything. The best we have is to judge which explanation is the most reasonable, (and that doesn't mean just picking whatever sounds good. It requires masses amount of proof).

God or anything supernatural isn't needed any longer to make a consistent model in the world. We've seen life spring up in vacuum from nothing but a couple of aminoacids and start reproducing in a laboratory spontaneusly. Introducing the concept of god into modern science today is standing it on it's head, making the models infinitely more complex. It just sounds easy..ie somebody just fixed it so we don't have to worry. But if god makes something from nothing, displacing matter each time it medles in the world, the effects would rapidly become catastrophic for us. Or maybe god thinks of that

There's not a lot in psychology that is considered science. The biology and neuroscience parts of psychology is very much proper science. But not the study of behaviour. Yes, they aply the scientific method, but their results are not repeatable in a way science accepts, which invalidates it as a scientific subject.

Trying to prove god by counting how many people have seen god just isn't valid evidence. Not acording to science. To reiterate. Because of the nature of the human brain, we cannot trust our own senses. We have to use external measurement devices. The human brain interprets all data instantly. Everything is filtered and nothing we see can be considered as raw data. Ie if we believe in god we can see god, if we don't we won't. This much psychology can tell us.

"Perhaps that is the real definition of faith, is one prepared to step from the circle of disbelief into the circle of belief."

I agree. But to quote Martin Luther. "The authority of Scripture is greater than the comprehension of the whole of man's reason." ie just don't think. Faith is based on and needs blind unreasoning.

I still admire you for your courage. You are very intelligent and give me a good match. I too have promissed myself never to post in this thread or any relgion thread many times. I just get sucked into it. Where's my Master when I need one. It's just that I feel strongly about this subject. We've got religious propaganda blasting us continously from every direction. Even in atheist Sweden the assault of brainwashing propaganda is massive. I just feel we've got to fight it or it'll take over and take us out of the enlightened age. Each time I see polititians telling scientists what they can and can't study I always feel uneasy. The only measure should be whether people suffer from teh science. Right? Not if god likes it or not?