Science and Religion, Part Deux

The "deux" part is my clever way of making reference to the EU Constitution issue. I would agree that in theory it would be nice if everyone "just got along," but I don't for a minute believe it'll ever happen. There seems to be a natural inclination of the human heart to form up affinity groups, even where physical differences don't exist.

Note: and this is apropos of nothing I've written before, or likely will again -- my computer terminal is on the other side of a wall from my clothes dryer. When the dryer is on the electric motor must put out a wave field that distorts my CRT image. The dryer is a gas dryer, so I know it's not the heating element. Oddly, the washing machine, which also has an electric motor, and which also is across the wall from my computer, does not generate this effect.

* * *
Look at that! Fancy large red asterisks!

* * *
Okay, in a perfect world the scientist sits in his laboratory and exercises complete neutrality -- neither for or against a particular theory, but rather considers all options with equal and uniform prejudice.

Does the same hold true if they have a $1M grant riding on their theory being sustainable? Does a scientist in the employ of "Greenpeace" also exercise equal and uniform prejudice? I would argue not. There is a whole study of what's called "junk science" -- science intentionally exploited to achieve a certain result. And in the world of politics and law, where this form of science is most frequently employed, the outcome can be devastating. The banning of DDT was based largely on junk science and Rachel Carlson's "The Silent Spring." Malaria rates are way up in the undeveloped world. Millions die.

I think the human condition enters into all we do, scientists being no exception to that. I do not believe any human is capable of pure objective neutrality.

But then again, I'm a complete cynic. :-)

* * *
Here's a basic, fundamental set of questions for you:

1. God created that which was the source of the Big Bang
2. God did not create that which was the source of the Big Bang

If #2, then:

1. God does not exist
2. God and that which is the source of the Big Bang were created by something else
3. God and that which is the source of the Big Bang both have no origin and have coexisted for eternity

If #3, then:

1. God had sovereignty over that which was the source of the Big Bang
2. God did not have sovereignty over that which was the source of the Big Bang

If #2, then:

What caused the Big Bang?