Scientific theories require faith, too

I had to smile when I read Mr Hales’ latest words on science and faith. Leaving aside his digs at people of faith, the thing he overlooks is that he too is an adherent of a fundamentalist faith.

That is, he regularly endorses the way that secular science is used to answer questions, and this in itself can be a very religion-like process.

An example is seen in belief in the Big Bang - the idea that ‘first there was nothing and then an explosion which gave birth to the universe.’

Big Bang theory today does not tally with data about the universe, so many assumptions are needed to hold it together.

It is assumed that ‘dark matter’ and ‘dark energy’ exist, even though neither can be observed or detected in the laboratory.

Further assumptions include a belief in the proposed ‘inflation model’ and other unproven phenomena. The theory, patched up with fudge factors, is believed by faith and proclaimed as fact.

Research teams fear having their funding cut if they disagree with it.

Astronomers hoping to get published make sure that their work conforms to it. Universities hungry for research funding, trumpet their claims to have made discoveries pertinent to it. And so on.

This whole scenario is quite unlike the unbiased science that Mr Hales imagines.

It also leads to fallacies, with figures such as Richard Dawkins claiming that ‘nothing created everything.’

I have no angst towards Mr Hales. If he wants to embrace the secular view, then that is his right.

But he should accept that what he has is basically another faith.

It sits alongside Christianity, Buddhism and all the other faiths, and it can be challenged just the same.

Joe Scofield Southdown