Why Science Is Wrong About God
December 11, 2007
Inspired (yet again) by an Edge.org exchange pitting scientist/person of faith Paul Davies against many other scientists ("Taking Science On Faith"), I have come to the realization after much searching that the undeniable truth of the matter has shown itself. And that truth is that SCIENCE IS WRONG. On which side it errs, I'm not sure yet, but it most certainly contradicts itself.
How does science accomplish this feat? On one hand, it searches for how things work. Not necessarily WHY things work, but HOW. This can only be decoded if one accepts the principle of cause and effect, i.e., everything is caused by something. Why does so and so happen? Because such as such happens, or because of this "law's" existence, or - you get the idea.
Once we agree that scientists accept that effects are the results of causes, we can quickly jump to the beginning of the universe, which of COURSE scientists agree exists, correct? And that's where the contradiction comes into play! There CANNOT BE a "beginning" if everything is caused by something, can there? Clearly, no, there cannot. The beginning must be caused by something, thereby making that other something the real beginning, which would then lead to THAT something needing something else, in an infinite regression. The contradiction is that since science asserts that there is no "supreme power" (not supreme "being", mind you, but simply something that causes everything else to come into being without itself being caused by something else) and also that things are caused by other things (processes, events, whatever the case may be), then it must be wrong on at least one of those counts.
Which is the incorrect assertion? Or are both incorrect? I don't know. But I do know that they cannot both be true; therefore, science is wrong. And, I might add, once again Aristotle is probably correct (with his "first mover" line of reasoning, echoed by Thomas Aquinas over a millennium later, and still plausible/reasonable almost 750 years after him).
Comments