==This is like claiming that clerks in the Swiss patent office made pioneering contributions to relativity.
Hmmm...Einstien, by no means a believer in organized religion, came to the conclusion that the Universe is the handiwork of a divine intelligence:
“Certain it is that a conviction, akin to religious feeling, of the rationality or intelligibility of the world lies behind all scientific work of a higher order. This firm belief, a belief bound up with deep feeling, in a superior mind that reveals itself in the world of experience, represents my conception of God.”
Ideas and Opinions by Albert Einstein, Crown Publishers, New York, NY, USA, pp. 36-39, 1954.
Sounds kind of like an ID scientist, no?
1. Einstein was a clerk in the patent office. His scientific ability was in no way retarded or advanced by his position. Believing in god was not his selling point for advancing his theories.
2. Every scientist may have believed in divine providence and may have mused about it but none claimed that their beliefs were supported by Science or hard experiment. I know of NO great scientist (& there are been some like Gauss & Maxwell whose sheer brilliance beggars belief) who published a paper detailing an experiment or even an intent connecting God to the creation of the Universe.
If you find a SCIENTIFIC PAPER in any journal (Nature has been around for over 150 years now) where Einstein,Bohr,Maxwell,Gauss,Newton et. al. purports to even suggest a theory that says God created the universe, please show me the citation.
A philosophical musing is not a scientific theory,
“Certain it is that a conviction, akin to religious feeling, of the rationality or intelligibility of the world lies behind all scientific work of a higher order. This firm belief, a belief bound up with deep feeling, in a superior mind that reveals itself in the world of experience, represents my conception of God.”
Ideas and Opinions by Albert Einstein, Crown Publishers,
New York, NY, USA, pp. 36-39, 1954.
Sounds kind of like an ID scientist, no?
No. He's not creationist. And he did not come to a conclusion. He is offering an opinion. He is comparing his assertion to a religious feeling, not an argument that where a conclusion is inferred from the premises. All he is doing is saying the Universe operates by certain rules which we don't fully understand. He does not like the uncertainty of Quantum mechanics. He is showing humility that we don't fully understand the Universe. This is different than Creationists (and ID'ers, one and the same) who proudly claim Creation is the only truth.