Biggest Complaint with Scientists |
| Posted by The Masked Crusader (cschalk) on Jul 19 2011 |
There is a farmer in New Jersey named Alex Tonetta[1]. You probably don't know about him or that he even exists, but he grows vegitables on his farm for wholesale. You might even purchase his vegitables in your local supermarket. But you cannot try to prove that he doesn't exist simply by saying that tomatoes grow from a seed. Mr. Tonetta grows plants from seeds as well, it's what he does.
Likewise, you cannot say God doesn't exist because you did a specific scientific experiment. For instance, an experiment on photons in a vacuum can't give you an answer to the hypothesis "God Exists". The photons won't prove or disprove the existence of God because God uses photons the same way you use photons.
This is the biggest complaint that I have with contemporary scientists. Too many of them dismiss a belief in God without doing adequate experiements. They come to their belief (or lack thereof) in God as a result of experiments that have nothing to do with the actual idea that a supreme being exists.
Stephen Hawking has recently produced a book which states that M Theory has enough gough behind it to create a universe without the need of a God. Thank goodness it is just a theory, because there's still the question of what came before hand. What came before the Big Bang? Why are the universal constants set to the exact settings to support life? I think these questions still require the need of a supreme being.
There are many religions that teach God exists, but also put God in a position that he can do anything he wants without regard to scientific laws. As I said before in the first part of this series, I believe that even God is required to adhere to the laws of the universe. I believe that he has knowledge of other higher laws that we currently don't know about, but I still believe that he must follow all the laws, even those that we currently do know about.
Last changed: Jul 19 2011 at 11:54 AM
Back