Replies

EM2,
Again you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but The concept of keeping "Science" in the science classes and "Religion" in the religion classes has never worked. Most evolutionists spend an inordinate time trying undermine religion with so called "science". Mr Hawkins being a current example. My engineering and science professors at Purdue did not feel the need to be so constrained to so called "scientific" definitions such as the one you provided and it made for both good discussion and deep contemplation. I failed to see the harm in it and certainly appreciated their candor.

Having said that, if science cannot prove God doesn't exist then it must contemplate that he might. Darwin already made the mistake of assuming that which he had no basis to assume and it has caused trouble every since.

To teach that God has created an infinitely complex universe hardly stifles science in my opinion. Instead it causes me to really look forward to each advance because unlike the end of a good story this one never ends and each chapter is better than the last.

Best Regards,
Boiler Plate

" Having said that, if science cannot prove God doesn't exist then it must contemplate that he might."

I agree. And their inability to prove that Santa doesn't exist means they have to contemplate he might too.

" To teach that God has created an infinitely complex universe hardly stifles science in my opinion."

It also does nothing at all to advance science. God is an untestable claim.

"Having said that, if science cannot prove God doesn't exist then it must contemplate that he might. "

Science can’t disprove and infinite number of things that are not its responsibility to teach. But again, that sounds like an excellent subject for a philosophy class, no more appropriate for Science than for Math or Spanish or Tennis class.

If our adolescents were compelled to go to Purdue where you encountered evangelical excesses, I’d be more concerned, but wouldn’t conclude that two wrongs make a right.

Teaching non-science in science is like marrying homosexuals. It potentially allows anything in, blurring its methods through lack of standards and corrupting its results.

Best Regards, Bill