The Nature of Science

Science should be understood as a recursive computational program that is exploring reality.
There are two primary components to this process: the methodology, and observations
The initial seed rules of the methodology are all atheistic
Then, observations are made, including of theistic methodology, as that's a thing in the universe
If theistic claims or theistic methodology were defensible, they would be adopted into the set of verified observations, and some of the methodology would be pushed into the methodology section
Then, future observations would be done, in part, by theistic methodology, e.g. prayer, reading of religious books, etc.
This hasn't happened
This hasn't happened because no observed theistic methodology or beliefs have been shown to be defensible
An so science is additionally atheistic in its observation set
Since I am making a universal claim, it would be quite easy to refute me, e.g. if Fen was interested
You'd show me an example of theistic methodology used by science, or a theistic claim found to be defensible
And then I'd have to update my model
+ innit  14:15:54
Now, it is true that science has explored theistic methodology, but only via the atheistic methodology
For example, a double-blind study done on prayer
There's a hierarchy of methodologies in the methdological section, where some methodologies have precedence over others, based of historical performance