This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
wildbill83 · 36-40, M
suchaslife · F
@wildbill83 Please explain, you got me fascinated
wildbill83 · 36-40, M
@suchaslife Francis Bacon, Galileo Galilei, Isaac Newton, Johannes Kepler, Andre Marie Ampere, Edward Hitchcock, Michael Faraday, James David Forbes, Adam Sedgwick, James Prescott Joule, Lord Kelvin, George Washington Carver, Werner Heisenberg, Wernher von Braun, Francis Collins, Freeman Dyson, etc. etc.
All famous thinkers, scientists, physicists, etc. That most intelligent people are aware of. Most of which are the forefathers/pioneers of most modern sciences.
All Christians...
Even Einstein and Darwin weren't so ignorant to try and "disprove" God, or make every argument a matter of Science vs Religion; that way of thinking is a relatively new development from more obscure "scientists"
Even Darwin himself was raised & heavily influenced by Anglicanism (Adam Sedgwick was one of his mentors that inspired him to pursue science).
Needless to say, it's a bit absurd when some atheist tries to disprove religious beliefs with Christian based science... 🤔
All famous thinkers, scientists, physicists, etc. That most intelligent people are aware of. Most of which are the forefathers/pioneers of most modern sciences.
All Christians...
Even Einstein and Darwin weren't so ignorant to try and "disprove" God, or make every argument a matter of Science vs Religion; that way of thinking is a relatively new development from more obscure "scientists"
Even Darwin himself was raised & heavily influenced by Anglicanism (Adam Sedgwick was one of his mentors that inspired him to pursue science).
Needless to say, it's a bit absurd when some atheist tries to disprove religious beliefs with Christian based science... 🤔
samanthasmokes · 36-40, F
@wildbill83
Hey, dude, you are on the level of Socrates himself who upset the apple cart when aristocrats and Sophists tried to make fabulous claims of certainty.
Good for you!
👍️
Hey, dude, you are on the level of Socrates himself who upset the apple cart when aristocrats and Sophists tried to make fabulous claims of certainty.
Good for you!
👍️
CharlieZ · 70-79, M
@wildbill83 Sorry, friend, you are confused.
I am not an atheist at all.
And part of my activity had been in the domain of scientific research.
In the actual scientific community, composed by hundreds of thousands, there are christians, jews, muslims, budhist, of other faiths and atheists.
They work together with no problems about and they ALL do Science, SAME Science and do it well.
Almost NO ONE of them (and we are talking of thousands) think that their OWN faith (or not having one) makes them a BETTER scientist!
They are too bussy doing Science to worry about absolutes.
No one of the lot of scientist I know, think that Science may refute God.
No one of the lot of scientist I know, think that Science may prove God.
There is not an atheist based Science.
And neither there is something like Christian based science.
Where is, one or the other, practiced?
Nowhere.
What may be said is that scientists refute (not the existence of God) is the narrative of only FEW that demmand to believe in frauds as ID as condition to be Christian or to be a scientist.
There are a lot more of non atheists (also christians) that support, as example, evolution than the ones that make to support ID to be taken as believers in God.
And ID, as example, is not Christian based Science for two reasons.
Is not a requisite for being Christian.
Is not even Science at all.
You listed scientists that were or are christians.
I personally know more of them, a lot.
But same for the ones in the past as today you will look in vain for one single supernatural factor INSIDE and as PART of their scientific documented research.
I am not an atheist at all.
And part of my activity had been in the domain of scientific research.
In the actual scientific community, composed by hundreds of thousands, there are christians, jews, muslims, budhist, of other faiths and atheists.
They work together with no problems about and they ALL do Science, SAME Science and do it well.
Almost NO ONE of them (and we are talking of thousands) think that their OWN faith (or not having one) makes them a BETTER scientist!
They are too bussy doing Science to worry about absolutes.
No one of the lot of scientist I know, think that Science may refute God.
No one of the lot of scientist I know, think that Science may prove God.
There is not an atheist based Science.
And neither there is something like Christian based science.
Where is, one or the other, practiced?
Nowhere.
What may be said is that scientists refute (not the existence of God) is the narrative of only FEW that demmand to believe in frauds as ID as condition to be Christian or to be a scientist.
There are a lot more of non atheists (also christians) that support, as example, evolution than the ones that make to support ID to be taken as believers in God.
And ID, as example, is not Christian based Science for two reasons.
Is not a requisite for being Christian.
Is not even Science at all.
You listed scientists that were or are christians.
I personally know more of them, a lot.
But same for the ones in the past as today you will look in vain for one single supernatural factor INSIDE and as PART of their scientific documented research.
Budwick · 70-79, M
CharlieZ · 70-79, M
@Budwick
"And why would that be surprising? Science uses science to support it's findings. That in no way discounts faith, God, etc."
And I agree with you in this.
Read please, my post:
(scientists) "They are too bussy doing Science to worry about absolutes.
No one of the lot of scientist I know, think that Science may refute God.
No one of the lot of scientist I know, think that Science may prove God.
There is not an atheist based Science.
And neither there is something like Christian based science."
I´m not surprised at all. Why should I?
To prove God and to denny God are not part of Science scope and neither of Science purposes.
What most of scientists, includding religious ones, do not accept is to call Science to what are faith based descriptions of the natural world.
That do not prevent them to have their own faiths and neither make religious and neither atheists to be better or worst scientists.
I was just answering to a post that made some out of sense assertions
- That there is something like a Christian based Science.
- And that the list of Christian scientists say something valid about Science itself.
Those assertions have no serious basis.
And, BTW, I would not personally say that Science discount God.
Because I personally believe in God, only faith based.
And because I personally do scientific research.
"And why would that be surprising? Science uses science to support it's findings. That in no way discounts faith, God, etc."
And I agree with you in this.
Read please, my post:
(scientists) "They are too bussy doing Science to worry about absolutes.
No one of the lot of scientist I know, think that Science may refute God.
No one of the lot of scientist I know, think that Science may prove God.
There is not an atheist based Science.
And neither there is something like Christian based science."
I´m not surprised at all. Why should I?
To prove God and to denny God are not part of Science scope and neither of Science purposes.
What most of scientists, includding religious ones, do not accept is to call Science to what are faith based descriptions of the natural world.
That do not prevent them to have their own faiths and neither make religious and neither atheists to be better or worst scientists.
I was just answering to a post that made some out of sense assertions
- That there is something like a Christian based Science.
- And that the list of Christian scientists say something valid about Science itself.
Those assertions have no serious basis.
And, BTW, I would not personally say that Science discount God.
Because I personally believe in God, only faith based.
And because I personally do scientific research.