In his piece, “Our Universe. Order or Chaos?” T. Nasser has already argued against the claim made by Victor J. Stenger in “God: The Failed Hypothesis” that the universe only exhibits pockets of complexity, by pointing out that the uniformity found in the universe indicates design. This article will further deal with the same atheistic arguments, and principles. The extract in question is presented below: (more…)
In 2007 Victor J. Stenger, an Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of Hawaii and former particle physics researcher published the book ‘God: The Failed Hypothesis’. Not only did this book prove to be a hit with other scientific atheists such as Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, but it quickly jumped into the list of New York Times’ bestsellers, proving successful with the public also.
The stated premise of the book is supposedly the rational, scientific (and therefore surely impartial?) analysis of the hypothesis of the existence of a higher power (i.e. God), by examining the information available. The title of the book somewhat gives away the conclusion. Stenger believes that a rational analysis of the universe leaves a person no choice other than atheism.
Researchers at the Delfth Technical University, Netherlands, have created an experimental concrete that contain harmless bacteria that upon the presence of rainwater activate to repair the concrete slab. Next step, talking concrete? To read more, click here.
In a recent article in the Guardian, Jeff Forshaw a particle physicist, writes that “Science and Religion are united in a shared sense of wonder” about the universe. It is a interesting read, where Forshaw expounds on the danger of not acknowledging the limits of science.
“By overstating science’s power and not acknowledging its limitations, we risk fostering the growth of a religion-substitute, with the scientists as high priests. Such hubris not only irritates people, but more significantly it risks promoting the misconception that science deals with certainty – and that is the very antithesis of good science.”
He explains how science and religion answer a different set of questions. Science is not concerned with the meaning of life. If the universe has any point to it or not, it doesn’t matter from a scientist perspective. Irrespective, of their viewpoints, science and religion are united on one point, that our existence, and nature in general “inspires glory and wonder”.
- How Science and Faith Can Work Together (yalepress.wordpress.com)
1400 years ago, the Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw) was vouchsafed the revelation that, “…we made of water every living thing.” (21:31) Today, this same principle is used as the basis for the the search of extra-terrestrial life! What a marvel that an unlettered dweller of the Arabian desert was given this knowledge on account of his spiritual perfection, whereas it took well over a millenium for the rest of the world to even conceive of the idea of extra-terrestrial life- let alone devise the means for finding it! (more…)
[The following was obtained from gonashgo Blog]
by Professor Alan Charles Kors
Isaac Newton entered Trinity College in Cambridge University in 1661. Every other college at Cambridge was dominated by the Aristotelian Scholastics, but Trinity College, Cambridge, was the one college in the university that was a Cartesian stronghold. That had a profound influence on the education of Isaac Newton because he was introduced to Descartes as an undergraduate, to Descartes’s mathematics, in particular. Descartes had founded analytic geometry, which made extraordinarily easier the sorts of calculations in which Kepler had engaged. Newton, then, early on was a student both of Descartes’s mechanical philosophy and of higher mathematics.