Posted on 10/06/2005 6:36:03 AM PDT by Michael_Michaelangelo
Dr. Henry “Fritz” Schaefer, the Graham Perdue professor of Chemistry and the director of the Center for Computational Quantum Chemistry at the University of Georgia, gave a presentation Tuesday night about the convergence of science and Christianity.
Schaefer is a five-time Nobel Prize nominee, according to The U.S. News and World Report. He is the sixth most-cited scientist in the world, and he is the author of more than 1,000 scientific publications.
He lectured on the Big Bang Theory, Stephen Hawking and God to a crowd of nearly 800 people at the Seretean Center Concert Hall.
(Excerpt) Read more at ocolly.com ...
Besides, the whole thread is just a SPAM for a guy selling books...
namecalling again....typical
OK. But, do you have faith in God?
Having one (a religion) does not guarantee the other.
abuse button hitting again....typical
Yeah, no doubt. He's gotta be making a mint at 5 bucks a pop.
I'm not clear on what you mean by faith in God, although, I do believe in the existence of God.
Which shows that you know nothing about "real scientists", and probably very little about God.
Everyone knows "real" scientists don't believe in God.
LOL! I believe God is quite capably sufficient to defend Himself.
If any scientist will find the face of God--it won't be a geneticist or anthropologist, they think too small--it'll be the physicist.
Thaks. Sometimes I've thought I'm the only one here who understands that.
There was a theory kicked around by some scientists some years ago that ventured "time" was similar to an unfolding hologram that allowed for events to produce varying results. Hence you and I have choices with varying outcomes - or so was the claim of the theory.
If the scriptures say the god of this world (or realm) is a liar and deceiver, building upon the hologram theory and the claim of scriptures, why would one expect that "hologram" not to reflect the same deceit?
I guess those answers will be afforded us someday.
The interesting thing in this and the transcipt of what Fritz said in the Leadership U lecture is how little he actually said. All one can really tell is that he believes in the Big Bang and that he thinks the ripples might have a divine origin. The rest is an attempt by Schaefer to interpret some ambiguously deistic musings on the part of physicists in the most religious possible light. Fine, he's allowed. But gosh, there is nothing here that a majority of the evos on this board couldn't agree with; and there's nothing I personally I find objectionable.
And which shows you have no sense of humor!
I disagree.
Reconciling the viewpoints is what allows the 'great divide' to exist.
Although I applaud this scientist's efforts at including his faith with his scientific explorations, I think he got the concept backwards.
His remarks... "Schaefer said if the Big Bang Theory is true then there are two things that are concluded: God and the universe are not the same thing, and God is not contained in this universe. "
God and the universe ARE the same thing, and the universe is contained in GOD.
One of the problems for scientists and theologians is that some of the terminology is difficult to agree on.
For instance, UNIVERSE. Establish a complete definition of that word, and it will be easier to debate the issue.
You seem to be very clear. Belief in the existence of God, is the primary ingredient of faith.
The word 'faith' has been difficult to delineate as it is often misused. People have been known to ask, "what faith are you.", when they mean "what religion".
God 'created' the physical, the material universe. Science is man using his GOD-given abilities to understanding that physical/material universe.
Since we are 'of' that physical/material world, it is not possible to go beyond it, to explain it, to see if from the outside.
The BEGINNING, the END, of the universe? We cannot know these things.
Take this story. Two hundred billion years from now, the universe ENDED. There was no living creature on Earth, or any other body in the universe to see it. There was nothing to see as all stars had expended (converted) their energy. All differences in potential had come to a balance.
SO. Nothing was happening, and Nothing was there to notice.
No 'matter', No 'mind'.
Gee, I wonder why? It's not exactly a great career move anymore to divulge one's true beliefs.
But gosh, there is nothing here that a majority of the evos on this board couldn't agree with; and there's nothing I personally I find objectionable.
Believe it or not, I post articles because I find them interesting, not because I wish to start a flame war. :)
When you've got 1000 papers and a named professorship, a certain feeling of security might be justified. The only think left for Fritz is the Nobel. Problem is, they gave the prize to Pople and Kohn just a few years back, and in the next tier of quantum chemists there are several very good people. I doubt he hangs by the phone in early October.
When you've got 1000 papers and a named professorship, a certain feeling of security might be justified. The only think left for Fritz is the Nobel. Problem is, they gave the prize to Pople and Kohn just a few years back, and in the next tier of quantum chemists there are several very good people. I doubt he hangs by the phone in early October.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.