Bible Q & A

Is Science Becoming Unscientific?

The current state of scientific inquiry is abysmal. Many "scientists" seem to discover what they wish to discover and disregard anything they find unpleasant. This is particularly obvious when "science" is used to further political ends. How can two perfectly good scientific studies on, say global warming, give two different results? Science is not relative.

So what went wrong? Why aren't the ideals espoused by science being practiced by many "scientists"? I blame three things: morality, evolution and naturalism. These three things have done more to damage true scientific pursuit more than anything else has. The funny thing is that all three things are illogical and unsupportable.

So what has morality got to do with science? The belief that the ends justify the means seems to be getting more and more prevalent. This is most prevalent in politics when certain radical political groups use "science" to support their cause. This is even prevalent in mainstream science as evidenced by evolution and naturalism.

I'll touch on evolution lightly here. For more on the illogic of macro evolution, please read an article I've written on this subject. Basically, the theory of macro evolution takes some examples of adaptation and builds an entire theory upon them. The fossil record does not support macro evolution in the least. Also, evidence against macro evolution is not even allowed to be presented. Those who would go against the flow are browbeaten into submission or discredited and left without an income. This is especially true when it comes to supposed human evolution. Most people don't know that many "scientists" who have their Ph.D. in a discipline related to human evolution haven't even been allowed to examine or view the actual supposed early human remains. For more on this, see the book, Bones of Contention by Marvin Lubenow

Naturalism inhibits true scientific pursuit more than anything else. Basically, naturalism is the idea that there is a natural explanation for everything and nothing else will be considered. At first glance, one may not see the problem with this idea. The problem is that it taints the interpretation of the data such that science's main advantage, that it is self correcting, becomes invalid. Science is not self correcting when a naturalistic theory can only be replaced by another naturalistic theory. It would only be self correcting if a theory could be replaced with the truth, no matter what that truth is. Also, evidence that contradicts especially popular and "important" anti-religious theories like evolution, is immediately discarded (see "Bones of Contention" mentioned above). So data is not evaluated on its merits, it is only evaluated on its ability to support naturalism. So if there was evidence that may go beyond naturalistic explanations, it would be immediately discarded.

The idea of naturalism itself is illogical and can be proven incorrect. Naturalism is illogical because it is self contradictory. If only natural explanations for things are allowed, how do you explain this idea naturally? Is there some natural law that says only natural explanations for things are correct? Of course not. In fact, the laws of nature themselves cannot be explained by natural laws. If they could, then could those laws also be explained by natural laws? On and on. So the theory itself cannot exist by its own admission and the theory itself is incorrect because it cannot explain the natural laws that do in fact exist.

So is this just the ranting of another anti-science Christian? Not in the least. There are many Christians who are scientists. I personally love science, when it's done correctly and when it stays out of the philosophical realm. The number of Christians in scientific disciplines needs to increase. Science would not be in such a sorry state if Christians did not shun science in the past, but became scientists. As Christians, we can save science and make it what it should be - an inquiry into reality, even if that reality points to the existence of God.

Mark Harpt
Editor
WWCW

Return to the Bible Q & A Main Page