Turns Out, Science and Religion Get Along Just Fine

reply to post by ArtemisE


He discovered the expanding universe and also Hubble's law. He actually finished the work of other scientists including Einstein and Hubble. Most of which were decades after he postulated the big bang.

reply to post by ArtemisE


So you've taken a YouTube video with no source quotes and attributed it to all scientists who believe in god...

Looks like the article in the OP was right.

reply to post by ArtemisE


I NEVER said religious scientists were useless once they found religion!!

I said no scientists religion has lead them to make a discovery and once the scientist thinks he is to the point in physics that god comes into play. He stopped trying to learn what mechanism really controls the thing and just assumes it's unknowable because it's divine.

reply to post by raymundoko


Neil degrasse Tyson is very accredited and active in the field of religion in public schools and such. I Don't find him to be a questionable source.

reply to post by ArtemisE


No. You said he's the one who claimed scientists stop trying...I'm asking you to provide proof. Which scientists? And I've already proven you wrong. Big bang and expanding universe were postulated because of a priests perception of the universe.

The only place I use this forum from is my phone, so that's no excuse not to findba scientist who quit trying...

ArtemisE
reply to post by ArtemisE

 

I NEVER said religious scientists were useless once they found religion!!

I said no scientists religion has lead them to make a discovery and once the scientist thinks he is to the point in physics that god comes into play. He stopped trying to learn what mechanism really controls the thing and just assumes it's unknowable because it's divine.

There is a legitimate concern here. Theists are more inclined to assume the answer before they've finished gathering the evidence. Bearing a conclusion in mind even as you examine the question is an easy way to miss things. It tends to orient your search around that particular outcome, particularly if you've already sold yourself on it.

reply to post by raymundoko

Actually I thought about it a bit more, and while his work and faith were separate, he was able to have both.

Co-existing is not the same thing as agreeable. Yes he was able to have both. I felt I acknowledged that.

Science and his faith co-exist because he separates them. His position is that they are not agreeable since he's agnostic towards Christianity's god. His position is faith based. He stated quite clearly there isn't evidence for the belief. Science demands evidence. Therefore the belief doesn't have a relationship with science. Co-existing, yes. Agreeable, no.

in reality that isn't the case and, per the poll, most scientists have some form of faith in a creator or consider themselves a member of a religious sect.

If 100% of scientists believed in Yahweh it still wouldn't mean anything unless science was applied in the investigation of the religious claims. That's what is being ignored in this thread. This is merely an appeal to authority. Look scientists believe it, scientists are smart people, therefore it's evidence religion is agreeable to science.

reply to post by raymundoko


In the video" naming rights" Niel names 5 or 6. Some of which were the most famous scientists of all time . Hee focuses in on sir Isaac Newton. Who is also the most intelligent person to live in Tyson's view.

reply to post by raymundoko


What!?!youve only proved that there have been discoveries by people who were religious. No one claimed they hadn't! I said no one ever used there religion to make a discovery!

The fact he was religious guiding his perception to make a discovery is like a bible falling on some chemicals and creating something..... That's not useing religion to further science in some way..... It could have been any book that fell.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


No. The article in the OP has nothing to do with appealing to authority. It has to do with the perception the media wants to portray and reality. The media wants to portray that real scientists don't believe in god or religion. The reality is the majority of us do.

reply to post by ArtemisE


Your logic is lacking.

It wasn't any book that fell. It was the bible...now your trying to wriggle out of it by saying it could have been any book. But that doesn't change the fact it was the bible, and his perception of the universe was based on his religious background.

He read that there was a beginning...he wanted to find it. He read that the heavens are being stretched put, he wanted to prove it.

That one man alone invalidates your thought process.

reply to post by ArtemisE


Right, I know the video. He never sourced any documents to back up his claims. It was his own opinion. Now you've taken his opinion as fact, so it worked.

reply to post by raymundoko

The media wants to portray that real scientists don't believe in god or religion. The reality is the majority of us do.

If that's the case then okay That doesn't really seem all together important to me for the reasons I brought forth. That's only a part of your OP though. The other part was 'religion and science are reconcilable' and that's what that post and all my others have been addressing. Do most scientists believe in god or religion? It wouldn't surprise me. I would be interested further in how that breaks down in the various scientific fields. Like what's the percent among physicists versus biologists, etc. That's just my curiosity that's peaked.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


Of everyone in this thread you're probably the one I would love to have a beer with to debate this over.

reply to post by raymundoko


Now beer is agreeable to both science and religion

reply to post by raymundoko


85% of Nobel prize winners are athiest. So I don't see how most Scientists are religious. Unless were useing scientist very loosely.

reply to post by raymundoko


There is no poll or similar to a poll type thing, that isn't opinion. What is a pretty fair bet. Is that if Tyson put that in his speech, as others have. Then there's no one famous or well known who has.

I know you can't be serious!!! If a bible falls off a table and knocks over some chemicals and that leads a scientist to make a discovery. That's religion progressing science.... Really... That sure is a low bar you set there.

No one who could look at the situation unbiasedly would ever agree with you.

Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by raymundoko

 

The media wants to portray that real scientists don't believe in god or religion. The reality is the majority of us do.

If that's the case then okay

That doesn't really seem all together important to me for the reasons I brought forth. That's only a part of your OP though. The other part was 'religion and science are reconcilable' and that's what that post and all my others have been addressing. Do most scientists believe in god or religion? It wouldn't surprise me. I would be interested further in how that breaks down in the various scientific fields. Like what's the percent among physicists versus biologists, etc. That's just my curiosity that's peaked.

A helpful member posted a poll which said more than half of today's scientists are theists. But according to the numbers, scientists are less likely to be theists. I'm curious to know whether they are theists in their professional capacity, or as a matter of personal opinion.

reply to post by ArtemisE


Jesus, your reading comprehension is horrible.

reply to post by raymundoko


Actually math and grammer were horrible. My reading and comp. we're off the charts.