Science comes in three forms: objective observation, and the same applied to either reductionist views or those of the whole. The former means reducing everything to the importance of individual parts, while the latter is the acknowledgment of the whole. As with astronomy and astrology, science and theology were also once intertwined, asking questions like: What is the meaning of existence and what are nature's secrets?

Kurt Gödel, an Austrian mathematician, demonstrated in 1931 the futility of using only reductionist thought in order to model a complex system. Although complex, such systems - i.e., all of nature - are comprised of their individual parts which themselves are whole systems. The seemingly logical nature of A relates to B and thus must cause C is an oversimplified way of looking at the world and works great if you desire to build a machine, bomb, or narrative around disease. It's easy to create associations using fallacies: one could easily say that since all humans have skin and die, that these two things are the leading causes of death!

In reality things are far more complicated and with this understanding it becomes clear how many things are made worse by solving problem A with solution B, since the result is usually the creation of problem X. This type of science is based on established opinion, not fact, but in fact dogma. Science has thus become a theological narrative itself, ironically mirroring the opposition it once had in the dogma of the Church, which still rejects certain scientific findings. But findings are not facts and proofs are only such of one reductionist part, not the whole.