Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Biochemist
This issue seems a little inflated. In spite of the hoopla over events like the introduciton of ID into schools, this is much ado about nothing.
A substantal number of basic science sorts are theistic. This does not mitigate their impact on science.
|
I've mentioned this myself before about not everyone out there who subscribes to science, evolution, etc at the same time has no belief in say a Creator of some type. I would say that the most vocal/ published amd known tend to have no belief in such. But over the years I have met many who do. Einstein, in a couple of comments he made irrespective of his own view about God did not see science and religion as having to be in conflect. I also see some major differences between some of the more recent ID ideas and much older more traditional fundamentalist Seven-day creationism. Evangelical Christianity is not all of the hard core fundamentalist attitude and one needs to bear that fact in mind when you discuss how to counter-attack, so to speak.
I think that as long as the normal methods and practices of science(ie Theory and trial by observational and experimental evidence) are followed open dialog on alternative theories to the standard evolutionary picture are possible. We, at this current juncture in physics have many alternative theories and counter theories going when it comes to the search for what's termed the Grand Unified Theory or TOE. None of this is found counterproductive to the search for the truth. What we need to be on guard against is a rejection of the scientific methods themselves in favor of pseudo-science or religious dogmaticism. But within the framework of acceptable scientific method and practice there is room for open discussion and debate.
