And here I was, all this time, thinking that scientists were just people trying to piece together facts and figure out how stuff works. Apparently, it was celestial mind-reading all along.
Whew, I'm glad that someone who already believes in God managed to shoehorn science into their pious worldview, otherwise science might be wrongly interpreted as an irreligious endeavor (or possibly even a threat to religion's influence) and then it would have to condemned as atheism and opposed by the faithful. And speaking of, someone really needs to tell the fundamentalists over here in the U.S. that science is complementary to religion, they seem to have missed the memo.
Heller has presented his idea of the unity of science and religion in various forums in recent months. "Physics says nothing about God, but our reflections on, our analysis of the physical, suggests the possibility that God exists outside of time," he said earlier this week in ChicagoUmmm...no it doesn't. Nothing in nature suggests anything at supernatural at all - not ghosts, not fairies, not angels, not demons, and certainly not gods. Rather, people who already believe in Gods imagine that nature points to their God, and every one of them believes in a slightly different God.
In fact, the whole "God exists outside of time" thing is a pretty transparent ad hoc hypothesis specifically devised because of the encroachment of science into what was previously religion's turf - explaining the natural world and the only unfalsifiable God of the Gaps left is the unknowable outside of the universe. Such hasty flights speak volumes of the indefensibility of the God idea.
"This is my idea but it was also the idea of traditional philosophy. Physics nowadays seems to support the traditional view."Oh come on! What traditional view is that? The traditional view is one of an interventionist god smiting his people's enemies, performing miracles and imparting revelations - a God who lives and acts in the world. Methinks a hidden god wasn't what they had in mind.
I sure hope the $1.6 million wasn't for that gem.
"If we ask about the cause of the universe we should ask about the cause of mathematical laws," he said in March when he received the Templeton Prize, a $1.6 million US award given annually to those who advance scientific discovery on "big questions" in science, religion and philosophy.
"By doing so we are back in the great blueprint of God's thinking about the universe; the question on ultimate causality: why is there anything rather than nothing?Normal person answer: "Well, we don't know, but it's possible that some form of matter/energy always existed."
Religious answer: "Because Jesus did it."
Normal person retort: "...but what created God?"
Religious answer: *crickets chirping*
Then why the heck do religious people bring ultimate causality up as some sort of knock-down argument for their beliefs when in actuality, they don't have any more of a clue than anyone else as to why things are the way they are? It's just silly. And it's even sillier hearing the same ancient apologetic thought-terminating cliches (i.e. God works in mysterious ways) spouted not only as if they were new and intellectually-savy things, but also worthy of praise and riches.