Another Victory For Science
The news the other day contained this story (ABC):
Pope Benedict has paid tribute to the work of the 17th century astronomer Galileo Galilei, who was convicted of heresy by the Catholic Church in 1633.
In an address marking the 400th anniversary of Galileo’s earliest observations using a telescope, the Pope said an understanding of the laws of nature could stimulate appreciation of God’s work.
Galileo was able to demonstrate that the Earth revolved around the sun and not the other way around, which directly challenged the church-held view at the time.
Earlier that day I had been reading a book by a Muslim about how Darwin is wrong. His argument was fairly typical of religious fundamentalists - everything is too complicated for ‘random chance’ to have ‘created’ it, and besides Darwinism, evolution and science generally asks too many questions that we may not yet have a complete answer to yet (always asserting that God does have an answer). It made me wonder how many years it will take until Darwin is vindicated and ‘paid tribute to’ by religious leaders?
Most religious people must realise that throughout history scientific discovery has been made and shattered the popular belief of the time, usually to the detriment of religion. Then religious thinking shifts as the leaders of religious groups try to remain current. Why can people not understand that it is possible to remain spiritual (if they wish) without denying scientific advances? Surely “an understanding of the laws of nature could stimulate appreciation of God’s work”?
Instead some religious groups use a pseudo-science where they pick and choose scientific facts to prove/disprove a ‘belief’ or an ‘idea’. I think the moral to the story is that you may pick and choose parts of your religious text which is relevant to you (and completely ignore the other things the text says which are just plain stupid in a modern situation) but you cannot do the same with facts discovered through the use of logical thinking and the scientific method.
Trinity on February 1st, 2009
I’m curious - have you read much regarding the research into the creationism *scientific* theory? Christian believers like myself don’t have to “deny scientific advances” to believe. I believe in intelligent design, in creation. There are other scientific theories out there than just pure evolution and chance to explain where things come from. We’re not just sticking our heads in the sand.
Reply
February 1st, 2009 at 12:26 pm
I have read creationist books and their arguments are rooted in the belief that God exists and he created everything. The fact of the matter is that belief should not play a part in scientific endeavour and understanding. How are you not sticking your head in the sand when you say “I believe that God created everything and therefore there is no such thing as evolution”?
The other theories you speak of are mostly myth, more rooted in the writings of various religious folk many many years ago. Have you read any of Darwin’s work? He doesn’t rely on just chance to explain our existance. At the same time he doesn’t claim to understand exactly how life first began. He merely explains how every creature on Earth shares a common ancestor and how the biodiversity that we see today all has a common root.
I think you misunderstand also when you say ‘pure evolution’. What is ‘un-pure evolution’? Creationism? Intelligent Design? Those ideas maintain that there is a purpose to our existence and that a being (who remains unexplained and unproved) created us ‘intelligently’. That is at odds with this idea of having a common ancestor and life being a miracle of randomness and mutation.
You should read some of Richard Dawkins books. “The Ancestors Tale” is a fantastic description of how we (humans) are cousins to all and it neatly explains Darwin’s theory and work. If you read “The God Delusion” he also explains how we need to rethink how we assess the existance of God using the scientific method.
Reply