Writer reveals ironic faith in science

Another week sees a letter from Mr Hales arguing the case for science over faith (Letters 16 July).

In this the latest one, he eccentrically wanders into an argument for vegetarianism. Mr Hales might be interested to know that I do not eat meat, partly for some of the reasons he puts forward. That said, has he thought that a faith-inspired prohibition on the eating of meat could have resulted in millions of people through history starving?

The overriding irony is that Mr Hales still cannot see that his confidence in science to answer life’s big questions is itself a faith.

Previously he informed us that secular science does not cling to pet theories, but instead moves forward in the light of new observations. However, this description can easily be shown to be false.

Some time ago, a group of 33 scientists criticised the way that the Big Bang model of how our universe originated has been turned into dogma (Bucking, New Scientist, May 2004).

They noted that proponents of the Big Bang increasingly resort to assumptions to make theory fit with data.

They went on to mention how dissent from the theory is not tolerated and how young scientists learn not to speak against the Big Bang model for fear of losing their

funding. Only projects that agree with the Big Bang get access to funding support.

The implications of this for science are ominous. It means that unbiased research and discussion become impossible, meaning that theory is not tested against contrary ideas and observations.

In this and other ways it becomes clear that the brand of science which Mr Hales promotes is really a faith position. Therefore, since he is in the habit of attacking faith beliefs, I think he should be consistent and give himself a stern ticking off. Joe Scofield Southdown