Proof in science does not require causation, only requires experimentation. The radioactive decay for example, we abandoned causality for it, but it is proven, even without a cause. And the absence of cause is the explanation most accepted today. We have no reason to assume the ontological and absolute causality, without having how to prove this dogma, and I don't think that one day we will be able to prove that causality is always a necessity.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
If radioactive decay is 'random', then how can we explain the fact that it varies during the course of a year?
https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/radioactive-decay-rates-vary-during-the-year.212315/
Radioactive decay is not random, it is probabilistic. They are different concepts. We can say what is the probability of decay happening, but we can not be sure that it will happen. The probability of the decay is determined, but the exact when the decay will happen is not.