Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

NeoGreen

(4,031 posts)
Tue Jan 2, 2018, 11:13 PM Jan 2018

Religion and Science Are Compatible, According to Researchers Paid to Say That

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2018/01/02/religion-and-science-are-compatible-according-to-researchers-paid-to-say-that/




Religion and Science Are Compatible, According to Researchers Paid to Say That
January 2, 2018 by Hemant Mehta

An article published today by Religion News Service makes a straw man argument against vocal atheists. Researchers Christopher P. Scheitle and Elaine Howard Ecklund say that if you talk to fans of “New Atheists” like Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris, “there’s a good chance” you’d hear them say something like, “religious people hate science.”

That’s obviously not true. There are certain kinds of religious people who denounce science and ignore evidence — Creationists, Christian Scientists, etc. — but it would be foolish to say all religious people (as if they’re a monolith) treat science as a dirty word.

The Catholic Church, for example, accepts evolution even if the leaders make wildly inaccurate and harmful claims about homosexuality. Evangelicals may well go into scientific fields, even if they compartmentalize work they do in a lab and things they believe about the Bible.

Even Dawkins and Harris will tell you that.


Snip

Creationist Ken Ham goes out of his way to talk about how everything in the Creation Museum is scientifically accurate. He just creates a made-up distinction between “historical” and “observational” science, a distinction no real scientist makes. Just about every credible scientist in the world dismisses his conclusions.

The point is: It doesn’t matter if religious people think their beliefs can co-exist with science. They either do or they don’t. The fact is certain religious beliefs go directly against scientific realities.
10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Religion and Science Are Compatible, According to Researchers Paid to Say That (Original Post) NeoGreen Jan 2018 OP
I'm not paid, and I'll say it. shanny Jan 2018 #1
You can believe in both. PragmaticDem Jan 2018 #2
30% of so-called scientific studies are made up nonsense according to a study I just made up. nt Binkie The Clown Jan 2018 #3
Of course religion is compatible with science. trotsky Jan 2018 #4
Yes, but let's explore how someone like Ken Ham... NeoGreen Jan 2018 #5
I've been in a few churches. Igel Jan 2018 #6
Do you think god exists, Igel? n/t trotsky Jan 2018 #7
No bias evident here. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #8
Ken Ham exists, and he isn't alone by any stretch. Mariana Jan 2018 #9
Fiction is compatible with Non-Fiction. Iggo Jan 2018 #10
 

shanny

(6,709 posts)
1. I'm not paid, and I'll say it.
Tue Jan 2, 2018, 11:59 PM
Jan 2018

At least they are if you are talking quantum physics and shamanism.

Slightly different vocab tho.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
4. Of course religion is compatible with science.
Wed Jan 3, 2018, 10:25 AM
Jan 2018

Just like Harry Potter is.

As long as you recognize that Harry Potter is just an idea that doesn't actually explain anything in the real world, it's 100% compatible with science.

NeoGreen

(4,031 posts)
5. Yes, but let's explore how someone like Ken Ham...
Wed Jan 3, 2018, 10:30 AM
Jan 2018

...fits into a NOMA model of reality.

I wonder where this rabbit hole will take us.

Igel

(35,390 posts)
6. I've been in a few churches.
Wed Jan 3, 2018, 12:27 PM
Jan 2018

My first church was mostly filled with people who didn't go to college. So they fit the stereotype.

The last two regularly have lay sermons and opening/closing prayers by people introduced as "doctor." They have their PhDs. Not in something like English or history, but in various branches of engineering, in chemistry, in physics. They see no conflict between chemistry and their faith.

In grad school an acquaintance nearly done his thesis in molecular biology confided to me that he was a young-Earth creationist. And was terrified that his advisor might find out. He had presented at conferences, cowritten papers, but to his advisor's mind denied the very basis of the field. Oddly, he treated it as a heuristic that worked. Rather like physicists used classical theory in working out frequencies given a black body's temperature but knew that at some point (prior to Planck's work) that their equations were crap. In other words, they relied on something which empirical evidence said was incorrect. They just couldn't figure out how to fix it. But it worked, so they used it. Very pragmatic, that kind of thinking.

What's amusing is the people who say that they are intelligent enough follow Alice's White Queen: Believing 6 impossible things before breakfast. Then mock those who merely believe two contradictory things at some point during the day. The problem is that pretty much everybody, if pushed, will find places where their thinking, beliefs, actions contract each other or the evidence.

Mariana

(14,863 posts)
9. Ken Ham exists, and he isn't alone by any stretch.
Wed Jan 3, 2018, 06:49 PM
Jan 2018

His views are popular. He's become rich because many, many Christians agree with him and give him money.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Religion and Science Are ...