Saturday, June 24, 2006


Peezee, science, and God

Over at his blog, Peezee wrote:

Denying that most scientists are non-believers when 60% are is just backwards. The situation is even worse than the statistics imply, I think; I know plenty of scientists who claim to be 'spiritual' and to believe in some vague kind of deity, and would probably be counted as believers, but their 'religion' is the kind that would have had them imprisoned or burned at the stake a few centuries ago, and certainly would be rejected by most of the modern advocates for religion. Face it. Most scientists are irreligious, if not outright atheists, and apologists like Numbers are in denial.

Peezee needs to acquaint himself with the concept of nonresponse. The Nature survey he is relying on had a 40% nonresponse rate for the 1000 "randomly selected" scientists (I would like to know exactly how they were selected) and a 50% nonresponse rate for the NAS members. Both of those nonresponse rates are very high and one would be justified in viewing the results with incredulity.

Listen, world. Dawkins and Dennett and Tyndall aren't arrogant: they're right.


You don't find that much arrogance in science.

Pull the other leg.

Why should I, or anybody, accept such a silly assertion? Religion adds nothing to science, let alone sight.

Modern science essentially emerged from Christian Scholasticism. It was the Christian belief in an ordered, rational, purposeful universe that allowed modern science to flourish in Europe.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Weblog Commenting and Trackback by