Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

At Newsweek: How Science Stopped Backing Atheists and Started Pointing Back to God

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Stephen Meyer, Director of the Center for Science and Culture, writes:

Headlines lately have not been encouraging for the faithful. A Gallup poll shows that the percentage of Americans who believe in God has fallen to 81 percent—a drop of 10 percent over the last decade and an all-time low. This accelerating trend is especially pronounced among young adults. According to a Pew Research Center poll, 18-29 year-olds are disproportionately represented among so-called “nones”—atheists, agnostics and the religiously unaffiliated.

Pastors and other religious leaders have attributed this trend to many factors: young people being raised outside the church, an unfamiliarity with liturgy and church culture, even COVID-19.

We found another answer in our national survey to probe the underlying reasons for this growing unbelief: a misunderstanding of science.

Perhaps surprisingly, our survey discovered that the perceived message of science has played a leading role in the loss of faith. We found that scientific theories about the unguided evolution of life have, in particular, led more people to reject belief in God than worries about suffering, disease, or death. It also showed that 65 percent of self-described atheists and 43 percent of agnostics believe “the findings of science [generally] make the existence of God less probable.”

It’s easy to see why this perception has proliferated. In recent years, many scientists have emerged as celebrity spokesmen for atheism. Richard Dawkins, Lawrence Krauss, Bill Nye, Michael Shermer, the late Stephen Hawking, and others have published popular books arguing that science renders belief in God unnecessary or implausible. “The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if, at bottom, there is no purpose, no design… nothing but blind, pitiless indifference,” Dawkins famously wrote.

God
ISTOCK

Yet, between message and reality, there is a major disconnect. Over the last century, important scientific discoveries have dramatically challenged science-based atheism, and three in particular now tell a decidedly more God-friendly story.

First, scientists have discovered that the physical universe had a beginning. This finding, supported by observational astronomy and theoretical physics, contradicts the expectations of scientific atheists, who long portrayed the universe as eternal and self-existent—and, therefore, in no need of an external creator.

Evidence for what scientists call the Big Bang has instead confirmed the expectations of traditional theists. Nobel laureate Arno Penzias, who helped make a key discovery supporting the Big Bang theory, has noted the obvious connection between its affirmation of a cosmic beginning and the concept of divine creation. “The best data we have are exactly what I would have predicted, had I nothing to go on but the five books of Moses…[and] the Bible as a whole,” writes Penzias.

Second, discoveries from physics about the structure of the universe reinforce this theistic conclusion. Since the 1960s, physicists have determined that the fundamental physical laws and parameters of our universe are finely tuned, against all odds, to make our universe capable of hosting life. Even slight alterations of many independent factors—such as the strength of gravitational or electromagnetic attraction, or the initial arrangement of matter and energy in the universe—would have rendered life impossible. Scientists have discovered that we live in a kind of “Goldilocks Universe,” or what Australian physicist Luke Barnes calls an extremely “Fortunate Universe.”

Not surprisingly, many physicists have concluded that this improbable fine-tuning points to a cosmic “fine-tuner.” As former Cambridge astrophysicist Sir Fred Hoyle argued, “A common-sense interpretation of the data suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with physics” to make life possible.

Newsweek

Comments
JHolo First of all there are those that do teach the details so I disagree with you completely on that, it’s one of the reasons why there’s such a pushback. This isn’t some innocent “just except us for who we are” movement, it’s far more than that and is often politically charged. So I will politely disagree with you because I have seen firsthand the dark side of your group and the very reasons why parents don’t want them teaching their children Now how should it be handled? well I think we should leave that up to the parents We do not have a right to determine what’s good for another parents child based on our own political and personal beliefs and that’s what’s going on here So should all trans and gay teachers be prevented from teaching? Well I know what that questions all about, it’s an attempt to back me into a corner to make me look like a hypocrite so I will answer it in the most immature way I can “yes they all should be fired and never allowed to teach” Look at that I’m not a hypocrite. (Emphasis sarcasm) I’m sure that if these trans teachers are talented at not teaching religion in the classroom I’m certain they can accomplish not proselytizing and teaching sexuality about themselves in the classroom too so I don’t think there’s any need to prevent them from teaching but if that proves to be too difficult then they don’t need the jobAaronS1978
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
09:12 PM
9
09
12
PM
PDT
Aarons1978@118. At early ages you are not teaching details, just the fact that people may be different and that they deserve respect. Some kindergarten kids have same sex parents. Other kids will become aware of this. How should this be handled? As well, there are transgendered teachers. Should they be prevented from teaching younger ages? Should they be prevented from teaching at all?JHolo
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
07:39 PM
7
07
39
PM
PDT
@102 jvl There is a time and place for all of that. That time and place is not Kindergarten or first grade When a certain level of maturity has been reached then it is more than appropriate Sex education happen for me when I was 13 by that time mentally I’m pretty sure I could handle it and I feel that might be a more Appropriate time frame to start teaching sexual identity if it really matters But going into a kindergartner class dressed up as a drag queen is in my particular opinion is confusing and damaging I don’t expect the kids to understand and certainly I am not going to try to explain that to my five or six-year-old I’m also going to not let my children at five and six play super violent video games or watch shows that might be inappropriate for them at that age And since you’re into making assumptions I’m going to assume you’re the type of parent that allows their children at the ages of six through 15 to watch porn because that’s every where and you should definitely tell your children about it It’s called being a parent…..AaronS1978
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
06:46 PM
6
06
46
PM
PDT
SA at 116, You have summed up what is going on here. It will just repeat from here. Punch yourself in the face and accuse the other guy of hitting you :)relatd
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
04:55 PM
4
04
55
PM
PDT
Relatd
Make a false accusation against your opponent. The best approach is to strongly suggest he is some sort of sexual pervert. Conservatives and religious types usually react strongly to that.
Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals: “pick a target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” In this case, you're arguing against perversion. But that's the classic leftist tactic. The person who seeks to protect society from sexual immorality is then accused of being either prudish or of harboring a perversion that he's covering up by his moral concern. This is standard stuff. I've seen it for decades. It traces back to the work of the Great Accuser himself - nothing has changed there. Taunt the target with obscenity, and when the target pushes back, act like a victim and accuse him of being hostile and ridicule him for being repressed.Silver Asiatic
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
04:34 PM
4
04
34
PM
PDT
AC
LOL. The bible was written by humans.
If someone told you an interesting story and then you told someone else the same story - would you take credit for having been the original author of it?Silver Asiatic
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
04:28 PM
4
04
28
PM
PDT
JH 111. shjame on you, you know that just the suggestion is tainting. KFkairosfocus
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
04:01 PM
4
04
01
PM
PDT
JH at 111, From page 3 of the Handbook. Make a false accusation against your opponent. The best approach is to strongly suggest he is some sort of sexual pervert. Conservatives and religious types usually react strongly to that. * Yawn *relatd
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
03:55 PM
3
03
55
PM
PDT
NOTES: 1] Activism seeks to manipulate archaeology by forcing researchers not to classify remains by sex, on gender-bender ideological grounds: https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2022/07/18/lgbt-activists-push-to-bar-anthropologists-from-identifying-human-remains-as-male-or-female/ 2] Reddit seeks to ban references to grooming behaviour of activists as hate speech: https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2022/07/18/woke-reddit-bans-the-word-groomer-as-hate-speech/ KF PS, the reality is, the activity targetting children is manifestly grooming behaviour. It is interesting to contrast the hostility to Sunday School above with the response of the same objectors to grooming behaviour.kairosfocus
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
03:52 PM
3
03
52
PM
PDT
Well, the “discussion” between Relatd and JVL has certainly been entertaining and very informative. Based on this discussion, I would feel comfortable having JVL babysit my grandchildren. And although i have had disagreements with KF, SA, Marfin and others here, I would feel that my grandkids would be safe with them as well. But there is no way in hell I would allow Relatd unsupervised access to my grandchildren.JHolo
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
03:46 PM
3
03
46
PM
PDT
JVL at 109, You have no knowledge of history. None. It's obvious. When TV was just 4 channels (3 in some places), a man appeared on TV. "I represent your TV station's Standards and Practices Department. We watch everything you watch to make sure it is suitable for the entire family." The material was screened to fit Moral Standards. These were set. In the 1960s, you could not say sex on TV or pregnant. TV shows were wholesome and everyone from Grandma to little kids could watch most shows together. Only movies with a lot of violence could be excluded. At the end of the day, the TV actually shut down but not before a beautiful film of a beautiful jet fighter was shown. As it flew through the air, a man's voice said: "Oh! I have slipped the surly bonds of Earth And danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings; Sunward I’ve climbed, and joined the tumbling mirth Of sun-split clouds, — and done a hundred things You have not dreamed of — wheeled and soared and swung High in the sunlit silence. Hov’ring there, I’ve chased the shouting wind along, and flung My eager craft through footless halls of air . . . "Up, up the long, delirious burning blue I’ve topped the wind-swept heights with easy grace Where never lark, or ever eagle flew — And, while with silent, lifting mind I’ve trod The high untrespassed sanctity of space, Put out my hand, and touched the face of God." High Flight by John Gillespie Magee, Jr.relatd
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
03:03 PM
3
03
03
PM
PDT
Relatd: “I guess you’re also against free speech.” Just throw the blanket over someone? I believe in throwing out the perverse on TV. Read what I write. I do read what you write. And you say things like 'banned' whereas I would not because I don't agree with you that some things should be banned just because you or I disagree with them. In fact, I don't even bring such things up because I accept that there's going to be content and topics in the mainstream which I find objectionable and/or false and misleading. But I don't say they should be banned. I accept that's that the way the system works and things are not always going to only represent my viewpoint. So why do you even say some topics should be banned? Why would you even think it's sensible or fair to prevent some content from being available? I'm not talking about how to make nerve agents or atomic bombs mind you. Certainly parents can control the content their kids are exposed to in their own home. But, outside of that, why would anyone even contemplate the idea that their own personal morals and ethics rule what is widely available and accessible? Why would you even suggest such a thing? Unless you didn't believe that no one view point or moral stance should rule the roost. Unless you thought that majority rules was not a great idea. Unless you wanted to toss that idea out the window. Why would you even say: some ideas should be banned? What kind of person says that? You think this is just my idea? That it’s just about me? If there's more than one of you does that make it right or justified? Who gets to decide what is allowed to be said or written? Is it you? Even if you're in the minority?JVL
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
02:47 PM
2
02
47
PM
PDT
JVL at 107, Do you read what you write? "... I chose NOT to try and throw the whole system out..." You have no idea, do you? Where did I write: 'throw the whole system out?" I did not. I brought up something specific and that it should be banned, but you are only showing the extremist side - all thrown out or nothing. Do get a grip. You think this is just my idea? That it's just about me? https://wamu.org/story/22/06/16/some-lawmakers-hope-to-crack-down-on-drag-shows-watched-by-children/ People can file a complaint with the FCC. https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us "I guess you’re also against free speech." Just throw the blanket over someone? I believe in throwing out the perverse on TV. Read what I write.relatd
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
02:02 PM
2
02
02
PM
PDT
Relatd: Just like JHolo, you are quoting mindlessly from the Leftist Causes Handbook. You can only accuse because that’s your job. You CAN find out the answers on your own but you refuse. Why? Because you are another OFFICIAL ACCUSER. And you are terrified of modern trends and interests. I do know what is going on and what is real and what is widely accepted by people in the UK. I live here. I work in a local primary school. I watch the news. My own child went through primary and secondary school in the UK. Can you say the same? RuPaul should be banned from TV. And anything similar. You have a vote just like anyone else. And you can and should use that vote to support the things you believe in and try and defeat the things you disagree with. But, in the end, you might lose some of your arguments. Just like I do. I chose NOT to try and throw the whole system out because I didn't win some arguments. Because I think that's the best way to run a country, by a majority consent of the constituency. If you've got a better idea then let's hear it. I condemn any comments that approve exposing children to perverse persons, men or women. And this needs to be pointed out. The goal of exposing kids to this is not a good one. Again, statements like this deserve to be condemned. Nice to know that you object to certain viewpoints being heard. I guess you're also against free speech. At least you're honest about that.JVL
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
01:56 PM
1
01
56
PM
PDT
JVL at 102, I condemn any comments that approve exposing children to perverse persons, men or women. And this needs to be pointed out. The goal of exposing kids to this is not a good one. Again, statements like this deserve to be condemned.relatd
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
01:56 PM
1
01
56
PM
PDT
Relatd: Home schooling is larger than you imagine in the U.S. I know it's common. In the 1990s I knew several families who home schooled and was invited to one of their graduation ceremonies in the Seattle region where literally hundreds of teenage kids were graduating with the equivalent of a high school diploma. They had to pass the same standardised tests to establish their abilities. You assume because I disagree with you on some things that I am ignorant or stupid or disagree with you on other topics. I have never, nor will I ever, argue against the right for parents to home school their children. I personally know of several children who were home schooled and went on to have great success in regular higher education. Your assumptions about me and my motives is insulting and laughable.JVL
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
01:48 PM
1
01
48
PM
PDT
JVL at 101, Just like JHolo, you are quoting mindlessly from the Leftist Causes Handbook. You can only accuse because that's your job. You CAN find out the answers on your own but you refuse. Why? Because you are another OFFICIAL ACCUSER. at 102, "I assume you object to RuPaul’s Drag Race being on mainstream television? And that video games which encourage a lot of shooting and killing being easily available?" Shooting and killing in video games is fake. Even kids know that. No actual person gets killed. Even kids know that. RuPaul should be banned from TV. And anything similar. "... that doesn’t mean you get to dictate to the rest of use what we chose to watch and, sometimes, pay for. " The Leftist (wannabe) Dictatorship is working very hard to be THE controlling force over what non-Leftists are allowed to watch on TV. Hypocrites.relatd
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
01:45 PM
1
01
45
PM
PDT
JVL at 101, Home schooling is larger than you imagine in the U.S. https://admissionsly.com/homeschooling-statistics/relatd
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
01:42 PM
1
01
42
PM
PDT
AaronS1978: So explained to me how being drag and trans which is 100% based on one’s sexual identity is not sexualizing our children in the classroom by exposing child to their over the top outrageous nonsense at an adolescent age? It's not telling the kids to be a certain way. It's just saying some people are that way. So what? It's true isn't it? Are you saying you want to deny telling children some things which are true because you don't like them? Pardon me for not wanting my 6 year old child being read Winnie the Pooh by a 6’4” drag queen named Priscilla HardnWet I assume you object to RuPaul's Drag Race being on mainstream television? And that video games which encourage a lot of shooting and killing being easily available?JVL
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
01:42 PM
1
01
42
PM
PDT
Relatd: Again, you prefer accusations and don’t bother to look into it on your own. Why is that? I’m sure you have access to the internet to get your question answered. I know because I have heard reported on the news over many years cases of where the Anglican and Catholic Churches have tried to avoid publicity and acknowledging that some of their clergy have been guilty of child abuse. I gave you links to Wikipedia articles about many of those cases. I am not denying that the churches have policies taking a stance against child abuse but the fact this that it has happened and that the churches have tried to avoid publicity and their clergy being prosecuted in a civil lawsuit. What am I saying that is not true or easily verified? Why are you trying to defend something that is, as you say, easily verified by a simple internet search? I’m not going to accept Leftists forcing their way into public schools and forcing kids to sit through lectures on deviant lifestyles. If I had kids in public or private school today, I would go over what they were taught and correct them. Fine, you have the choice to home School. That has been available for many years to anyone who objects to state sponsored curriculum. Also, I know from personal experience that what you are talking about is rare to the point where I have never experienced it or know of any case that happened in my area. I'm not saying it didn't happen just that it's not wide spread and rampant. The ONLY thing Leftists will accept is a school system that is controlled by them and that teaches what they want it to teach. So, you don't accept a democratic system where you might be on the losing side. Got it. Mum on the phone to her child’s school: “If you do not end this totally inappropriate practice immediately, I will file a complaint with the proper authorities. My God, should children ever need to be exposed to this?” I guess you also object to mainstream television programmes like RuPaul's Drag Race? A show that is very popular over here and, I think, in the US. I get that you are desperately afraid of modern trends and fashions but, guess what, that doesn't mean you get to dictate to the rest of use what we chose to watch and, sometimes, pay for. Over 100 years ago some people were desperate to avoid giving women the vote. Over 100 years ago many people were desperate to avoid giving black people the vote. Before that many people were desperate to avoid giving non-land owning white men the vote. Now you are desperate to avoid alternate lifestyles from being discussed and presented in schools. Aside from your religious objections has it ever occurred to you wonder what it is you're so afraid of? What you personally are going to lose, if anything? Has it ever occurred to you to ask: what if I am in the minority?JVL
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
01:38 PM
1
01
38
PM
PDT
AC t 99, You lack knowledge - that's all. From the Catechism of the Catholic Church: "136 God is the author of Sacred Scripture because he inspired its human authors; he acts in them and by means of them. He thus gives assurance that their writings teach without error his saving truth (cf. DV 11)." You should ditch your human ideas about the Bible and God. If you get some news directly from God, do let me know. In the meantime, the Catechism presents the truth.relatd
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
01:34 PM
1
01
34
PM
PDT
@relatd:
The Bible is the Word of God. Do not misrepresent it. That includes the prophets who were appointed by God.
LOL. The bible was written by humans. And your prophets have no certificate from god. Anyone can claim to be a prophet, it doesn't make him or her one. I advise you to ditch the inferior books and human ideas about god and go directly to the source: god. I'm actually fascinated by the christianists refusal to do so.AndyClue
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
01:30 PM
1
01
30
PM
PDT
AS1978 at 97, Exposing kids to a lifestyle choice like this is wrong. Kids should be allowed to be kids and only encounter age appropriate materials and situations. So-called Drag Queens are nothing more than men dressed like women, but trying to indoctrinate kids to this? That is very wrong. It should be banned. But I know efforts are being made to have non-school events with men dressed like women and parents are told to bring the kids. Again, a total ban on this in schools and any public event is in order.relatd
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
01:28 PM
1
01
28
PM
PDT
So explained to me how being drag and trans which is 100% based on one’s sexual identity is not sexualizing our children in the classroom by exposing child to their over the top outrageous nonsense at an adolescent age? Pardon me for not wanting my 6 year old child being read Winnie the Pooh by a 6’4” drag queen named Priscilla HardnWetAaronS1978
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
01:21 PM
1
01
21
PM
PDT
Law that requires patients under 18 years old to notify their parents or guardians in order to get an abortion upheld. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-lets-indiana-enforce-abortion-parental-consent-requireme-rcna38744relatd
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
01:06 PM
1
01
06
PM
PDT
More about drag men: https://wwmt.com/news/local/drag-queens-should-be-in-every-school-michigan-ag-says-at-conference-report-claims-attorney-general-dana-nessel-pride-trans-transgender-students-kids-children https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10922785/A-drag-queen-school-Michigan-AG-faces-wrath-Republicans.htmlrelatd
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
12:41 PM
12
12
41
PM
PDT
LCD at 92, "Mommy. They had men dressed like ladies at school today. Why is that?" Mum on the phone to her child's school: "If you do not end this totally inappropriate practice immediately, I will file a complaint with the proper authorities. My God, should children ever need to be exposed to this?"relatd
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
12:36 PM
12
12
36
PM
PDT
JVL at 90, I know a family who home schooled. I know why they home schooled. They don't want their kids exposed to deviant lifestyles at public schools. I'm not going to accept Leftists forcing their way into public schools and forcing kids to sit through lectures on deviant lifestyles. If I had kids in public or private school today, I would go over what they were taught and correct them. "... you just might have to accept that things are going to be different from what you would like?" The ONLY thing Leftists will accept is a school system that is controlled by them and that teaches what they want it to teach. Parents who home school are avoiding that mess.relatd
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
12:31 PM
12
12
31
PM
PDT
JVL I haven’t seen drag queens
:lol: There are no mirrors in schools? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/07/16/drag-queen-story-time-primary-school-children-prompts-backlash/Lieutenant Commander Data
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
12:27 PM
12
12
27
PM
PDT
JVL at 89, Again, you prefer accusations and don't bother to look into it on your own. Why is that? I'm sure you have access to the internet to get your question answered.relatd
July 18, 2022
July
07
Jul
18
18
2022
12:26 PM
12
12
26
PM
PDT
1 2 3 4 5 6

Leave a Reply