The debate is not about the existence or non-existence of God but rather about whether it can be scientifically proved. I submit that the existence of God is outside of science.

Regarding Professor Collins, I do not question his credentials or his intelligence. However he has staked a position clearly in the Intelligent Design camp. His writings are not overviews on the science of God (if there could be such a thing) but rather tracts designed to convince people of his existence.

Unfortunately, if the posts from Feroz accurately describe Collins' video on YouTube, it would appear he is not above misrepresenting the evidence. This puts him into the same fraudulent company as Ben Stein and others associated with the ID camp.

Above all, science is about the search for the truth, wherever it may lead. One cannot be a scientist and set out to prove God exists. The best one can do is follow the evidence. Right now the question appears to be unanswerable through science. Some people have a problem with that.

Our friend Feroz, for example, believes God controls every aspect of the Universe but yet cannot reveal his hand openly. In that he appears to be searching for reasons why there is no proof, rather than accepting that God may not his existence to be provable. However, the lack of knowledge in an area can never be proof of God's existence. That would contradict the very verses of the Quran that Feroz uses to bolster his case that God's existence should be provable.

Listing the many scientists who believe in God does little to further the debate. In particular, your citation of Blaise Pascal should be taken in the spirit of my earlier post about why he chose to believe in God.