International Cat Speculators Since 2006


This is a good story from The Times.

THE scientist who led the team that cracked the human genome is to publish a book explaining why he now believes in the existence of God and is convinced that miracles are real.

Francis Collins, the director of the US National Human Genome Research Institute, claims there is a rational basis for a creator and that scientific discoveries bring man “closer to God”.

His book, The Language of God, to be published in September, will reopen the age-old debate about the relationship between science and faith. “One of the great tragedies of our time is this impression that has been created that science and religion have to be at war,” said Collins, 56.

“I don’t see that as necessary at all and I think it is deeply disappointing that the shrill voices that occupy the extremes of this spectrum have dominated the stage for the past 20 years.”

For Collins, unravelling the human genome did not create a conflict in his mind. Instead, it allowed him to “glimpse at the workings of God”.

“When you make a breakthrough it is a moment of scientific exhilaration because you have been on this search and seem to have found it,” he said. “But it is also a moment where I at least feel closeness to the creator in the sense of having now perceived something that no human knew before but God knew all along.

“When you have for the first time in front of you this 3.1 billion-letter instruction book that conveys all kinds of information and all kinds of mystery about humankind, you can’t survey that going through page after page without a sense of awe. I can’t help but look at those pages and have a vague sense that this is giving me a glimpse of God’s mind.”

Collins joins a line of scientists whose research deepened their belief in God. Isaac Newton, whose discovery of the laws of gravity reshaped our understanding of the universe, said: “This most beautiful system could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful being.”

Indeed, the thought that there might be conflict between science and Christianity to me is laughable given how much of our modern science is founded on the work of those who believed that both were in perfect harmony.

Those that disagree please generate comments using a random letter generator then select phrases that will survive in your mind. 🙂

Advertisements

Comments on: "Genome Project (and other stuff) Claims Evolutionist(‘s Atheism)" (11)

  1. …is laughable given how much of our modern science is founded on the work of those who believed that both were in perfect harmony.

    Such people (e.g., Copernicus) did indeed go looking for such perfect harmony, to understand and thus honor his god. He didn’t find it though, not according to his expectations. And that’s the critical thing here – not the motivations of the individual, but what they observed and what results others could confirm or reproduce. The same is true of all subsequent scientists – what they believed was irrelevant – only what they could demonstrate was relevant.

  2. david w said:

    (I don’t know if this is moderated or if the last time I wrote this comment the internet ate it, sorry if it’s a repeat….)

    I’ll take up your challenge , this phrase took about 2min to evolve using the “weasel algorithm” (and is true)

    Collins hasn’t completely lost his mind, still very much an “evolutionist”.

    A purely random search would probably have taken longer than the current age of the universe. Just something to think about.

  3. Hm, is it really evolution if God used it?

    But you are right, he’s not a creationist. My point is not that, but rather that he now sees God’s hand in his work.

  4. Then why use the term “evolutoinist”? One which splits the world into people that believe in evolution, whether it was God’s way of getting things done or not, and those that believe in a special act of creation?

    I actually agree entirely that there is nothing inherently conflicting between religious belief and the world revealed by science. But if you think that why use a term that splits people into rationalists and those that think the bible or koran take precedence over the natural world?

  5. He’s no longer what most people think of as an evolutionist – he no longer believes that the world was created by random chance.

    But it’s not the best choice of headline, you’re right.

    I’d say he’s on his way to becoming rational myself 🙂 I personally believe that evolution of any sort is quite irrational, having physical evidence in the world to show that plenty of theories are just not believable (strata of rock and large canyons that have been seen formed over hours for example).

  6. Think the new title is a little more curate.

  7. I think you have been misled my someone who thinks his faith would be threatened if some combination of genesis 1 and 2 wasn’t a literal account of the way God made the world.

    It’s true that in some, exceptional, circumstances you can get rapid formation of strata (I don’t know about hours but I’ll believe you for now) but that doesn’t mean all such strata are formed in this way. Or have anything to do with Potassium Argon or lead-lead dating, the presence of the same fossils in the same strata all over the world, dates for the divergance of gorups of organism estimated from the molecular clock…

    I encourage you to check out some reliable sources

  8. Wow, a scientist and a theologian. 😉

    Rapid formation of strata in creation science *is* from exceptional circumstances – the flood.

    I’m no expert, but standard creation science holds that there is no such thing as there being the “same strata all over the world” – there are all sorts of mixes all over the place, and the “standard set” that evolutionists claim isn’t actually in place anywhere, even the grand canyon. But that’s just what I’ve read.

    However, it’s perfectly expected for “simpler” organisms to be lower if strata came from the flood – bigger organisms are able to get out of the way of the flood much easier than smaller, so smaller tend to get stuck sooner, meaning they’re in lower layers.

    I’ve seen photos of trees fossilized through your (standard?) layers that took millions of years to form, I’ve heard of whales having the same thing happen. Then there’s the fossils that have been found in real life exactly the same after “millions” of years of evolution – unchanged.

    I really need to do a decent post on creation/evolution, but I never seem to get around to it.

  9. Thanks for the link to the book.

    The book will stand or fall on its own merits. Even if the logos “I love Jesus” were written asymptotically on every base pair, there would still be an unlimited number of further inferences to be captured in an illative system, and hopefully some testable hypothesis resulting from the book, rather than the dole of ID poetry that makes believers’ neurons twitch and froth with glee over scientists coming their way. While a belief in miracles hasn’t been contra-indicated since Hume (who tolerated potential counter-proofs in his excellent treatise against miracles), the standard criteria for identification, corroboration, and testing (perhaps joint witnessing – contra Hume’s assay against testimonial reports) would still need to overcome large number theory (coincidence) in order to overcome the incommensurability impasses of subjectivity, and to have persuasive value to a larger population pool.

    If the author of the book has a genetic or epigenetic algorithm for establishing a data-set of miracles, he could sell his research to European theologians, where the empirical theological-bent wants to cooperate with social medicine concerns.

    The inveterate morass of impractical practical theology in the US, grounded in no-praxis (except evading lawsuits), and enamored by speculative pursuits, would likely be in a state of apoplectic shock at how to respond to a praxis of miracles.

    Cheers,

    Jim

  10. OK, I’m not going to pretend I understand what Jim had to say. And I’m certainly no theologian, just noticing there is a very strong correlation between people that have problems with evolution and biblical literalists…

    It’s true that there is no spot on earth at which we can see a complete record of geological history. In westland you can find ~510 million year old rocks but that’s only because younger deposits have been eroded! The point is if you go to the chathams and look at 70million year old rock (dated by some radio-isotope) you’ll find dinosaurs (as well as plenty of ‘simple animals’ that have always existed, not only in the lower strata) as you will in china. You never find a hippo or a bat. There are examples of trees growing through strata,but if you take absolute dates for these strata you find these are the result of catastrophic events – lahars and the like.

    “living fossils” like the tuatara and the coelacanth really haven’t changed that much, morphologically, for a very long time but that’s only a problem for one of commonly help misconceptions about evolution. Evolution doesn’t require and endless progression on change from worse to better – asking why are tuataras still similar to older tuataras is like asking why are their still monkeys if we evolved from them – because there is still a perfectly good living to be made as a monkey (or a tuatara) so there hasn’t been any selective pressure to change.

    I think you should heed Augistine’s advice with regard to hucksters that one to sell believers on the problems with evolution:

    “Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. ”

    Anyway, I’m sure neither of us want to go point to point on this ad infinitum, I just want to make it clear that there may be more to this evolution idea that you’ve given it credit 😉

  11. At least we have in Francis Collins, the director of the US National Human Genome Research Institute, one scientist with great distinction happy to have a glimpse of God from the results of his work of science.

    osolev

Comments are closed.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: