Every hypothesis and theory is an act of faith.
Furthermore, the more science has advanced the more it has validated the Bible. Cosmology is in total disarray since the latest scientific dogma about the expanding universe has been totally destroyed by learning that galaxies are accelrating away from each other, not the reverse as the dogmatic science of our high school textbooks had previously taught us. The founder of modern science and the scientific process to which you allude was a strong believer in Christ and the truths of the Bible. (Sir Isaac Newton)
The next major advance in science was by Einstein who himself believes God must be behind everything.
The greatest mind in quantum electro-dynamics, Feynman, also believed God must be behind physics because he could not believe how certain universal constants came to exist without Him.
It is also no coincidence that science and engineering have flourished in a Christian environment. As Jefferson noted, Christianity allows for the greatest expansion of the mind and science.
"There are more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible than any in profane history." -- Sir Isaac Newton, father of modern science
Perhaps you weould like to lecture Sir Isaac about scientific processes and their obviation of Biblical truths?
"It has been my experience that the disbelief in the revelation that God has given...is more prevalent among what I may call the camp followers of science than amongst those to whom science is the business of their lives." -- Dr. Alexander MacAlister, Biologist, Physiologist. Professor of Anatomy at Cambridge University
Bzzzt! Wrong! "Faith" is believing in the unseen and unexperienced. Science accumulates data on the observable and testable.
Furthermore, the more science has advanced the more it has validated the Bible.
Your opinion, which you are indeed entitled to.
The next major advance in science was by Einstein who himself believes God must be behind everything. The greatest mind in quantum electro-dynamics, Feynman, also believed God must be behind physics because he could not believe how certain universal constants came to exist without Him.
One must define one's terms. Einstein was deliberately vague on his religious beliefs, as is Stephen Hawking. With regard to Sir Isaac Newton, one must consider the times in which he lived. So, did/do these men define "God" as a discreet celestial entity, or perhaps something altogether different? Go ahead and crawl into their minds. I'll wait for your answer.
I feel a nasty wet feeling on my scalp. I hpothesize a seagull is flying overhead. Hey presto, a new religion is born.
Cosmology is in total disarray since the latest scientific dogma about the expanding universe has been totally destroyed by learning that galaxies are accelrating away from each other, not the reverse as the dogmatic science of our high school textbooks had previously taught us
Huh?
The expansion of the universe had been taught pretty much since Hubble. Could the problem be that you weren't paying attention to what they taught you?
The next major advance in science was by Einstein who himself believes God must be behind everything
Einstein specifically denied believing in a personal god. You're quote mining.
The greatest mind in quantum electro-dynamics, Feynman, also believed God must be behind physics because he could not believe how certain universal constants came to exist without Him.
Patrick: you're going to have to add an extension to the humor wing of your gallery of regrettable posts. Maybe a couple of double-wides.
Yes of course he did.
And Paul Dirac believed in Santa Claus
And Galileo believed the moon was made of Green Cheese
And I believe claims made by Creationists
"The greatest mind in quantum electro-dynamics, Feynman, also believed God must be behind physics because he could not believe how certain universal constants came to exist without Him."
I'd like to see the source for this claim. I highly doubt he said such a thing. Everything I've read about Feynman indicates he was either an atheist or an agnostic; he was prickly when talking about science and God, and science and philosophy. If I remember right, he supposedly lost his temper at his father's funeral when he was asked to read something from the Torah.
(I really liked Gleick's biography of Feynman: Genius. Its also full of interesting side notes or diversions about other "geniuses.")
A hypotheses is a conjecture. You test it to find its truth. No faith there. A theory is an explanation for what has been observed, in all those hypotheses and tests. It is variable, changing to fit what has been observed. No faith there.
Furthermore, the more science has advanced the more it has validated the Bible.
Science has validated that the Earth is flat and immovable? Rabbits chew cud? Pi is 3?
Perhaps you weould like to lecture Sir Isaac about scientific processes and their obviation of Biblical truths?
Isaac couldn't explain some things about the orbits of the planets, and thought God did it. We later found out the scientific explanation. ID is purely "God of the Gaps" and doesn't belong in science. Take it to the philosophy class.