Religion, mammoths and dinosaurs,

[Bodicoteblue]

Huge generalisation, GD, based on...??

I don't doubt that there are many things that cause people/ scientists to lose faith when they see things happen to others. But, by the same token there are people that are more swayed to the open question of a Higher Power by witnessing 'things' or finding no comfort in scientific 'answers' when there are none; the 'Big Bang' being the most 'unanswered' question regardless of the current theories.

There are around 18% of scientists, in the US, that still have a Faith. Amazing when only 20% of that nation attends church. If we multiplied that across the world, that will hold comfortably to about 20%-25%.

That's not too bad for a modern average, these days.

I like to consider myself pretty educated on physics and in particularly the Big Bang model and literally have no idea what this means.

Why is the Big Bang "the most unanswered question regardless of current theories"?

And by "theories", I presume you mean "evidentially based science"?

Well, firstly, I'm sure you'll tell me how the 'Big Bang' is tested beyond refute and then we'll move on.

Huge generalisation, GD, based on...??

I don't doubt that there are many things that cause people/ scientists to lose faith when they see things happen to others. But, by the same token there are people that are more swayed to the open question of a Higher Power by witnessing 'things' or finding no comfort in scientific 'answers' when there are none; the 'Big Bang' being the most 'unanswered' question regardless of the current theories.

There are around 18% of scientists, in the US, that still have a Faith. Amazing when only 20% of that nation attends church. If we multiplied that across the world, that will hold comfortably to about 20%-25%.

That's not too bad for a modern average, these days.

If 18% of scientists have religious faith then 82% don't .
If 18% of scientists go to church in a nation where 20 % of the population attend , then the attendance of scientists is below the national average.
Not really amazing.

It is considering that church attendance has fallen in accordance to a more self serving society.
It falls right in line.

It doesn't matter what the attendance figures are - the percentages are still the same so my point remains .
Could a "self serving society " that no longer goes to church not be a more "scientifically aware " society that no longer needs a church?

 

[SWP's back]

I was using the quote to underline the understanding of it's spherical basis in BC times.

Sorry but do you think the theory of heliocentricity relates to the shape of the Earth?

I can answer that in many ways, but let's see what mean when you better define your question...

They are nothing to do with each other. What your post above simply states is that ermmm yes you did and you got a bit confused.

Don't sweat it.

 

[SWP's back]

Bigga states that 18% of scientists believe in God in the US (although he left his source out).

He then states that only 20% of Americans go to church. We obviously don't have a figure of the percentage of scientists that attend church.

What he is trying to do is compare apples with oranges as believing in God and going to church are not one and the same.

92% of US Citizens believe in God.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/147887/Americans-Continue-Believe-God.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.gallup.com/poll/147887/Ameri ... e-God.aspx</a>

So what we can conclude is that being a scientist makes you 4 to 5 times less likely to believe in a supreme being. That seems about correct to me. Not that it should have any bearing on the actual topic as argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy.

 

[Skashion]

Well, firstly, I'm sure you'll tell me how the 'Big Bang' is tested beyond refute and then we'll move on.

Why can't you just explain what you mean first so you both know what you're discussing. It's not just me that seems to have this problem with you. You seem to like to keep things vague just so that you can go off on another tangent when you don't like the answers or responses you are getting on a specific subject.

 

[Skashion]

Einstein believed in Spinoza's Nature/God where everything is part of one deterministic whole. This belief led him to waste many years through his steadfast belief that quantum theory required randomness and that could not exist in his belief system. Hence it coloured his work in that field.

Evidence please.<br /><br />-- Sun Apr 20, 2014 5:28 am --<br /><br />

So, from that point of view, how could one dismiss Einstein's thoughts on that matter??

Einstein was wrong. Quantum physics is well-established now.

 

[pominoz]

It is considering that church attendance has fallen in accordance to a more self serving society.
It falls right in line.

It is considering that church attendance has fallen in accordance to a more educated society.
It falls right in line.

 

[Gelsons Dad]

Einstein believed in Spinoza's Nature/God where everything is part of one deterministic whole. This belief led him to waste many years through his steadfast belief that quantum theory required randomness and that could not exist in his belief system. Hence it coloured his work in that field.

Evidence please.

-- Sun Apr 20, 2014 5:28 am --

So, from that point of view, how could one dismiss Einstein's thoughts on that matter??

Einstein was wrong. Quantum physics is well-established now.

@skas
Einstein was happy to use "actuarial tables" as he assumed that eventually new discoveries would remove their use but he was mistaken. This troubled him through the rest of his life as can be read in the Born - Einstein Letters. "That business about causality causes me a lot of trouble.....I must admit that...... I lack the courage of my convictions"

He never came to terms with the lack of causality because it contradicted his own beliefs. Hence his much quoted "God doesn't play dice". That quote in itself is evidence of a scientist's work being coloured by religious belief which was the point of including it in the first place.

 

[Skashion]

No, that's not evidence.

 

[Gelsons Dad]

No, that's not evidence.

That business about causality causes me a lot of trouble

A direct quote from Einstein. What else do you need?

and from the letters themselves:

We have become Antipodean in our scientific expectations.
You believe in the God who plays dice, and I in complete law
and order in a world which objectively exists, and which I, in a
wildly speculative way, am trying to capture. I firmly believe,
but I hope that someone will discover a more realistic way, or
rather a more tangible basis than it has been my lot to find. Even
the great initial success of the quantum theory does not make me
believe in the fundamental dice-game, although I am well
aware that our younger colleagues interpret this as a consequence
of senility. No doubt the day will come when we will see whose
instinctive attitude was the correct one.

If this is not evidence of Einsteins beliefs colouring his work then I don't know what is!

 

[Skashion]

You are being too literal-minded. I'm an atheist and even I sometimes deploy God as shortland for natural laws and processes. That is not evidence that only his belief in a God stopped him from embracing quantum mechanics. Quantum physics is very messy and still unexplained like spooky action at a distance and very unintuitive. You didn't need to be religious to dislike something so unappealing to the scientifically minded.

You are attempting to create a causal link between two separate things that there is only the flimsiest quotes to sustain.