Many past scientific theories have been proved wrong.
Yes, by the accumulation of evidence that showed them to be wrong, and not until then.
In any case I do not recall science proving there is no spirit world or a God.
You know better than to expect to reverse the burden of proof without being laughed at. If you claim God and spirits exist, you must prove it.
In science, we often hypothesize the existence of something because we observe something that isn't presently explained by what we already know. But we don't stop at the hypothesis and just take it to be true. We find a way to test the hypothesis to see whether the thing we suspect might exist actually does. If that test fails, we throw out the hypothesis and try something else.
As noted, this is what we did with the neutrino. We didn't just up and decide today that we wanted a new particle because it would be neat. The observation of beta decay wasn't fully explained by the existing model. The neutrino hypothesis followed from what would need to be true in order to extend the model to account for it. Then we tested for the actual existence of a particle that fit the criteria, and found evidence that indeed such a particle existed—not because we wanted it to, but because it was actually there.
We're in the middle of a similar process with dark matter and energy. We hypothesize that such things might exist because they would explain certain observations that aren't predicted by our current model. That doesn't mean we just up and declare that dark matter exists. We need to figure out how to test whether it does. And if we come up with a test, and it fails, then we have to throw out the dark matter hypothesis and come up with a different explanation. This takes time.
In contrast, you're not trying to explain anything with gods our spirits that our current models don't already cover. We already know how certain psychological and phenomenological factors generate belief in the supernatural without there actually needing to be a supernatural element. Your elaborate system of gods, demigods, angels, spirits, and karma exist solely to serve themselves—not to explain anything that needs explaining.
Beyond that, you simply have no evidence that any of what you propose actually exists, and little interest in providing any. Instead you whine about the closed-mindedness of your critics, the oppression of secular science, and your perception that you can't prevail in an intellectual debate only because your critics are more sophistical and devious than you.
You're trying to submit your beliefs for scientific inquiry. The possibility that such an inquiry might not tell you what you want to hear is exactly how science is supposed to work. That's why science consistently succeeds in the long term while religion stands still and cries in its tea.
cei-spiritistcouncil.com
