Science or Theology?

It is well known that the Jesuit physicist, Georges LeMaitre, conceived the astronomical Big Bang Theory in order, as the late Hannes Alfven recalled, to reconcile his physics with his theology.  Afterwards Albert Einstein thought it an excellent explanation.

But which spawned what?

Clearly it was LeMaitre’s theology that spawned the Big Bang theory, partly supported by the observation of the astronomical red-shift, later shown to have been misinterpreted by the late Halton Arp, that the red-shift is not a measure of distance.

So it is theology that is driving science, rather than science, theology.

One of the problems the Big Bang theory has is explaining how, after the initial explosion where everything is moving away from everything else, that in the future, this outward motion mysteriously reverses and matter begins to accrete or accumulate. An expanding universe cannot have colliding galaxies by simple definition, and neither is it possible for matter moving away from every other particle of matter, to then suddenly reverse direction, and start to accrete; it is simply a theological nonsense in which the miraculous dominates.

Yet it is the standard astronomical model, in which stars form from gravitational accretion, along with planets. that dominates scientific modelling of the solar system and the earth leading to some novel, often bizarre, explanations.

And it all starts with the assumption of an unobserved event, Creation.

The problem for the Creationists is that it, creation, is not a physical event but an imagined event by pre-existing humans, since the humans had to first exist in order to subsequently think and then imagine concepts, in order to explain physical reality.

However, like it or not, separation of the church and state is a recent innovation of civilisation, and while theoretically established, it is clear that religion continues to determine political reality, and how science is conducted.

I cannot imagine 2.5 billion Christians, 1.5 billion Muslims, 1 billion Hindus etc contemplating a scientific theory that contradicts their core civilisational idea based on creation.

As Voltaire is alleged to have said, it is dangeous being right when government is wrong.

About Louis Hissink

Retired diamond exploration geologist. I spent my professional life looking for mineral deposits, found some, and also located a number of kimberlites in NSW and Western Australia. Exploration geology is the closest one can get to practicing the scientific method, mineral exploration always being concerned with finding anomalous geophysical or geochemical data, framing a model and explanation for the anomaly and then testing it with drilling or excavation. All scientific theories are ultimately false since they invariably involved explaining something with incomplete extant knowledge. Since no one is omniscient or knows everything, so too scientific theories which are solely limited to existing knowledge. Because the future always yields new data, scientific theories must change to be compatible with the new data. Thus a true scientist is never in love with any particular theory, always knowing that when the facts change, so too must he/she change their minds.
This entry was posted in Politics, Science. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Science or Theology?

  1. Pingback: Flipping Geology: Dante’s Inferno | MalagaBay

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s