The word "hypothesis" misleadingly suggests that you are investigating it to prove or disprove it. I don't believe that's the case -- I think you are simply uninterested in gods, goddesses, and penis-enhancing herbal remedies.
Plate tectonics isn't a claim about the supernatural, so, however improbable a claim about it seemed in the early twentieth century, it could eventually be evaluated as methods of observation improved. But a claim about the supernatural isn't subject to such progress. A claim about God is an add-on that cannot be proved or disproved naturalistically, so it doesn't improve any explanation of natural phenomena. Those who make an improbable claim that it does ought to offer evidence of it.
The virtue of science is that it has made it unnecessary for us to have any hypothesis concerning God or gods or goddesses. Science doesn't seek to disprove the existence of God or gods or goddesses, though it can and (if called upon) does disprove specific miraculous acts attributed to God or gods or goddesses. God or gods or goddesses -- and hypotheses concerning their existence or lack thereof -- are merely irrelevant to science, so they are not included in it. It is science's lack of interest in God -- rather than any argument against God's existence any scientist makes -- that really outrages theists who are not content to reduce God to a matter of ethics. -- Yoshie
* Critical Montages: <http://montages.blogspot.com/> * Monthly Review: <http://monthlyreview.org/> * Greens for Nader: <http://greensfornader.net/> * Bring Them Home Now! <http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/> * Calendars of Events in Columbus: <http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html>, <http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php>, & <http://www.cpanews.org/> * Student International Forum: <http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osudivest.org/> * Al-Awda-Ohio: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio> * Solidarity: <http://www.solidarity-us.org/>