A blog of Science, Secularism, Snark, and lots of other Stuff! Follow me @BenSweaterVest
Sunday, July 1, 2012
On Puddingology
Recently I have found myself using this argument from one of my favorite blogs BlagHag, so I made it into a meme for easier use. After all, I am from the internet.
As a biology graduate, I had to study evolution in detail, and had to learn about current thinking regarding abiogenesis and so on. I can tell you that the field of biology, in general, makes no scientific claim that life could or could not have an origin which could only be answered by quantum physics ect and which is not inherently biological (ie what we might now consider "supernatural"). There really is little evidence at the moment, however opinion is obviously in favour that it is not "supernatural", but that the answer probably lies in physics and chemistry more so than biology. (although as soon as you prove it leads to life, it would fall under biology, and once you get to Univeristy level you realize all the sciences overlap and can become indistinguishable).
So it is probably not within the scope of the science we know of as biology. It is similar to how the sun, gravity, asteroids, volcanoes the water cycle and the list goes on, are all important to the field of biology but a scientist who dedicates his life to studying these and makes ground breaking discoveries is usually not a biologist. So for a forest ecosystem researcher to believe that God created the universe and very early life, it probably wouldn't effect his research. Which has to get peer reviewed anyway.
Edit: Biological Sciences faculty top 50 in the world. And not theist.
The idea of a Creator is inseparable from the notion of the supernatural. The supernatural aims to explain a mystery by supposing a far greater mystery - a mystery that can never be corroborated or tested in any meaningful way. This belief ensures that the believer will never get to the bottom of the matter because they believe getting there is impossible. They will always stop at an equation and be satisfied because they see their job as 'seeing how God did it' and not 'what the hell is going on here'.
As a biology graduate, I had to study evolution in detail, and had to learn about current thinking regarding abiogenesis and so on. I can tell you that the field of biology, in general, makes no scientific claim that life could or could not have an origin which could only be answered by quantum physics ect and which is not inherently biological (ie what we might now consider "supernatural"). There really is little evidence at the moment, however opinion is obviously in favour that it is not "supernatural", but that the answer probably lies in physics and chemistry more so than biology. (although as soon as you prove it leads to life, it would fall under biology, and once you get to Univeristy level you realize all the sciences overlap and can become indistinguishable).
ReplyDeleteSo it is probably not within the scope of the science we know of as biology. It is similar to how the sun, gravity, asteroids, volcanoes the water cycle and the list goes on, are all important to the field of biology but a scientist who dedicates his life to studying these and makes ground breaking discoveries is usually not a biologist. So for a forest ecosystem researcher to believe that God created the universe and very early life, it probably wouldn't effect his research. Which has to get peer reviewed anyway.
Edit: Biological Sciences faculty top 50 in the world. And not theist.
The idea of a Creator is inseparable from the notion of the supernatural. The supernatural aims to explain a mystery by supposing a far greater mystery - a mystery that can never be corroborated or tested in any meaningful way. This belief ensures that the believer will never get to the bottom of the matter because they believe getting there is impossible. They will always stop at an equation and be satisfied because they see their job as 'seeing how God did it' and not 'what the hell is going on here'.
ReplyDelete