Science does not have a secular humanistic agenda, it is a side effect of the only path it can take.
End of quote
There is not even such a side effect.
Whatever secular humanism is, science does not endorse or deny it.
Whether G-d exists or not is completely immaterial to the question of whether evolution is possible or not (it is) and to the question of whether evolution explains why we have so many different species of plants and animals (it does better than other ideas).
Since Creationists think G-d is relevant in a field that looks for explanations based on reproducible experiments, they came up with "Intelligent Design", which removes G-d from the equation and hence, they think, removes what scientists won't allow.
Well, it doesn't work. Scientists do not object to G-d being in the equation, they object to unfalsifiable elements being in the equation. Whether G-d or a space alien creates the different species does not make a difference to the scientists if neither can be demonstrated at all.
If G-d's influence on nature could be measured and demonstrated, scientists would gladly accept G-d in their equations.
But as it stands G-d and space aliens are in the same bad situation here: they are presumably very powerful but cannot be shown to exist.
Dawkins' atheism has nothing to do with his scientific credentials. Atheists are not better scientists; even though many atheists, having not much else that distinguishes them from total idiots, believe that atheism alone is a scientific qualification of some kind.
Dawkins is villainised by religious groups because he villainises those groups. It's hardly surprising that they, he and the groups, don't like each other. But opposition to his position on religion has nothing to do with whether he is right or not when it comes to evolution.
Evolution will work and will have happened with or without a god. The fruit fly experiment, and many another, that shows how one species can change into two, works the same, regardless of whether G-d watched the scientists or cannot for lack of existence.
And the two populations of fruit flies, incapable of interbreeding with each other, will interbreed only among themselves, hence, over millions of years, create two quite different types of animals. And again that will happen with or without a god.
I can tell you here and now that I think that Richard Dawkins is an arrogant idiot when it comes to religion. But that opinion of mine doesn't make me reject his scientific work. I don't see how it naturally follows that since he is an atheist, I have to oppose whatever results he comes up with in a field that I know has nothing to do with G-d.
Atheist beliefs are just as conflicting with science as theist beliefs. You are wrong there. Scientists do not "accept" atheist beliefs and reject theist beliefs. Scientists do accept neither and reject nothing. Scientists reject gods as irrelevant for their research, but they also reject whatever an atheist can come up with as irrelevant for their research, if it is irrelevant.
My belief in a G-d Who does not interfere with the laws of nature He created does not conflict with the scientific method AT ALL. However, an atheist belief in space aliens (that cannot be seen or heard or perceived in any way at all) DOES conflict with the scientific method.
Deism does not interfere with the scientific method. Scientology does. The Catholic Church's teachings do not interfere with the scientific method. Fundamentalist Protestant Christianity's teaching does.
It has nothing to do with god or no god, but with whether you are willing to allow for a method that simply doesn't take your pet fact that cannot be perceived in nature into account when looking for answers.
Science specifically looks for answers that don't involve things or events that cannot be measured without denying that things or events that cannot be measured exist. They might exist, but they are not part of science.
And let's assume that the Bible is true. And the world was created by G-d 6000 years ago (actually, 5768 years, but who is counting?).
That wouldn't change a thing in science.
Because science would still research the world as it can be perceived. It has NOTHING to do with truth, just with facts.
And "facts", as the name says, are those things and events that were made, not the underlying truth.
The truth was made by G-d too, as one interesting reading of the Bible suggests:
"Bereshit bara elohim et"
The first words of the Bible ("In the beginning created G-d" followed by the preposition for a direct object: "et"). The statement continues with "the heavens and the earth". But the "et" is the part that I was pointed to recently.
The preposition "et" is spelt Aleph Tav, the first and last letter of the Hebrew alphabet (compare English A-Z). The reading here suggests that G-d created the alphabet first.
And what is the alphabet? Another Jewish legend says that the alphabet, since its first letter is Aleph, its middle letter is Mem, and its last letter is Tav, is symbolic for the "truth" ("emet" spelt Aleph Mem Tav). So the first thing G-d created was the truth, and the world is built on it.
(We can continue this game by removing the Aleph and we remain with Mem Tav, the root for death, which suggests something or nothing or perhaps something else or not much. It doesn't matter.)
The point is that THAT just now was religion and not science.
(And if you think that word games are not religion remember that man ("adam", Aleph Dalet Mem) was created out of earth ("adama", Aleph Dalet Mem He). That's a word game too, although one lost in translation, I suppose.)
You will also find that many scientists are Catholics or believing Jews who find no problems with reconciling their (rational) beliefs with the idea of not relying on faith to demonstrate how something works in real life. Similarly many car mechanics go to church but few of them would attempt to fix an engine by replacing the fuel line with a belief that G-d will magically transport the fuel into the engine. (It MIGHT work, I cannot disprove it, but it would be stupid to rely on it and reject the traditional use of physical materials for the connection (or demand that teleportation by G-d be taught in mechanics schools).
JoeUser Forums
Stardock Forums
