I can believe that a Higher Intelligence Entity (HIE) cannot be proven. I am willing to accept that a HIE cannot even be definitively induced, even for marvels that we cannot demonstrate at this time (e.g. natural transformation of elements into living material). We could always invoke a HIE for anything unexplainable, but it is always only a hypothesis.
What evidence is there against a HIE? If all laws and events are derived from natural causes, it would be a strong proof, but still not conclusive. How can we decide if all laws and events are "natural"? What does that even mean? To prove a HIE does not exist, we must show that there is no possibility that it can exist.
This is where I believe I am stuck. I am within a system, attempting to disprove the existence of something outside that known system. At best I can speculate that something is indeed there or not. However, for me to accurately evaluate this external factor, I would need to either be external to the system or be omniscient. Of course if I was either of those, I'd probably be a HIE. I'm not.
So I can't prove that a HIE exists after all. Can I?
LucidSky -- Desperately searching for answers and finding only more questions.