Say they are looking for E.T. life out there in the Universe which I am 100% sure they are doing right now. Tell me that they can NEVER EVER say that E.T. life does not exist?
Because they HAVE to look till they have found life or till they have run out of resources for finding it. But they can never say that E.T. life does not exist. What's the difference between E.T. life and God? They can't prove either one yet they say (I'm sorry to the scientists who believe in God) that God does NOT exist because no one can scientifically prove it and at the same time they are not eliminating the possibility that E.T. life exists. ...just wondering.
Or am I wrong in stating that scientists have disregarded God?
And I'm sorry for posting this in your forum but I want answers from scientists and not from religious people.
2007-11-07 11:39:56 · 15 answers · asked by ? 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
Ok I get the point. I can see how scientists view God now. Just because a little kid says that you must find Santa and his reindeers doesn't mean you have to.
2007-11-07 11:47:05 · update #1
Aw I'm sorry Kevin. I really should have stated Science and not scientists.
2007-11-07 12:02:28 · update #2
Scientists NEVER stop looking. They may make a determination, but are open to new information that could cause them to change their perception accordingly.
With science, the truth is always welcome.
2007-11-07 11:42:06 · answer #1 · answered by ►solo 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are many good answers already presented here. I think we need to remember that scientists are just people. They are not anti-religious any more than any other group of people on Earth. Their approach to knowledge may require more proof than simply accepting something based upon belief, but they are not unsympathetic towards other points of view. It would be wrong to place all scientists in a group and make a statement that they are all such and such.
The astronomy field is based upon observational evidence. Many people believe that because life exists on Earth, it must exist elsewhere. Yet, it is only accurate to state that extraterrestrial life does not exist until it is actually found. Clearly the possibility exists and that justifies the search.
ET would be alien life. Such could potentially exist upon other Earth-like planets in our galaxy and these would be detected visually. God is not a physical being unless one states that since God created the Universe, God is the Universe. God cannot be touched. God is a spiritual phenomenon.
Scientists, such as Einstein, commonly state that the more we learn about the Universe, the more we find out about God. I tend to agree. Astronomers cannot find God anymore than a geologist or plumber or librarian. But learning about atoms or galaxies or calculating the speed of light or even attempting to mathematically determine the physics of the first hours after the Big Bang (yes, even believing in the Big Bang itself) in no way denies nor disproves the existance of a Creator.
2007-11-07 12:45:41 · answer #2 · answered by Troasa 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's an old saying that 'absence of evidence is not evidence of absence'.
People used to think that there was an 'ether' pervading space. They never could find it, and experiments that should have found evidence for it failed. Once they realized that they could account for every known phenomenon without the need for ether, then there was no reason to believe in it, and nothing to be gained from believing in it, so they stopped.
Occam's Razor says that you should not needlessly multiply entities. Physics and mathematics and astronomy all work without the need to incorporate God, so there is no reason to include him. It's not that scientists have decided he doesn't exist, it's just that, on the evidence available, it doesn't matter whether he exists or not, so why bother?
Your argument regarding ET life is actually a similar situation. Nothing that we have yet observed requires that ET life exists. It seems obvious to many that it COULD exist, but the universe is a big place, so they are hard to identify. However, we do have a means for searching for ET life (examining radio waves) so at any time, we could get solid evidence of ET's. Is the same true for God?
Most people seem to believe that we can never find true evidence, that God doesn't work that way. If that is the case, then there is absolutely nothing to be gained by trying to find such evidence.
Most scientists don't care about ET's, and whether they exist or not will not affect their work. The same is true for God. However, in neither case is this a matter of 'belief' or 'faith' - it is just convenience.
2007-11-07 11:58:05 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The nature of this particular quest is such that they will never give up, no matter how long it takes. Some things can be rejected with confidence. Not ever absolute, but enough that it is no longer pursued. But since the cosmos is so big, scientists realize that we will never see all the way to the end of it and there will always be many, many potential places and times for life to arise. No one will ever conclude that life doesn't exist elsewhere. But the economic demands around them may prohibit searching as much as some people would like.
2007-11-07 11:53:03 · answer #4 · answered by Brant 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think that any serious scientific body would ever deny that something exists -- at least any material thing.
They can and have said that there is no scientific evidence for thing X, meaning no evidence at the time they say it. They might even say that it is not worth spending time & money to look for X, because there are better things to look for.
And individual scientists might say "there is no X", but that is not "official".
As for the flying spaghetti monster, I have it on the best authority that it does not exist. The invisible pink unicorn (blessed be her holy hooves) has declared it so. She said it, it must be true. That's official enough for me!
2007-11-07 12:22:58 · answer #5 · answered by morningfoxnorth 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
82% of the top scientist in the world at Lawrence Livermore Lab are Christians. That's the same percentage as the general population.
2007-11-07 12:01:09 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is often said and correctly so that you cannot prove a negative, that is you cannot prove that something does not exist. And it is certainly true that God exists, not necessarily as a tangible being, but most certainly as an intangible spirit or idea or belief. Existence isnot limited to tangible objects. Who could deny that honesty and hunger exist, for instance
2007-11-07 11:53:10 · answer #7 · answered by Renaissance Man 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well scientists experiment their prediction and what they believe exists
if it can be examined by other regular people and a majority of other scientists who claim to see the exact same thing
they are able to conclude that it exists
however, if only one scientist claims that it is there, but another says that it is not, then they cannot say that it exists
2007-11-07 11:43:03 · answer #8 · answered by tochau 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
a real scientist is a searcher of proof.
just because the scientist cannot prove GOD does not make GOD an unbelief.
that is the way of the scientist.
2007-11-07 12:06:38 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
umm they didnt, i hear DNA analysts, physicists, and other ppl say they believe in God all the time....i have to admit thats weird. we cant prove anything, we can even prove that we arent an experiment carried out by aliens. SUCKS, but any view is "wrong" until proven, which it cant, so making a choice is wrong.
2007-11-07 12:26:57 · answer #10 · answered by bryant s 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋