"Disappointing, Stu, coming from an ally, but I still love ya baby"

Aww…*blushes* .… ta Steve. As I see fellow scientists who do have faith yet produce some incredible work, I'm willing accept they have reconciled their faith with their science. I don't personally know these people, but some of them are world authorities and are massively capable people. So whilst I personally do not have a faith, I do have hope that there could be some common ground between science and religion, even if the methodologies and philosophies are seemingly too different to reconcile.


"Without it, we are left with the coldest "man-out-of-mud" kind of materialism"

It might seem that way, but it's not. The indifference of the universe to our fates is scary, but there is wonder there too, and a deep profundity that gives meaning to life and is the basis for a solid moral code; all discovered by science. As the Sagan quote illustrate (thanks Jack - a truly inspirational passage), spirituality is a part of being a scientist (for myself at least) and is based in objective truth and not superstition and in that sense is not the same spirituality as that experienced by a religious person. When Sagan talks about spirituality he means that we are the universe itself made conscious, contemplating itself and its own nature. This is why the scientific method is so wonderful and powerful, a constantly refined methodology for inquiry that is an unbroken process going back to the earliest scientists. As a scientist I don't need to invoke a supernatural being to comfort me in the cold, hard universe because we are inseparable from it.

The universe creating art, music, cheese butties, beer, Aston Villa, microscopes, Lego, iPads, irish bouzoukis, Cheetos, ballet, Laurel and Hardy etc etc. I mean, think about it. No cold, hard materialism there, but warm, living, creative and vibrant materialism with a profoundly spiritual and scientific basis.


"has it ever occurred to you that the cry of extremist is a subjective judgment. the further a pov is from your own stand ,the more extremist it becomes in your estimation. therefore it is meaningless talk as far as meaningful communication is concerned.

same is true of claiming the other side of the argument engages in lies and misrepresentation of the facts."

You can try to wiggle out of this all you want, but the truth is yours is an extremist point of view, retrogressive, unthinking and rather vulgar in approach. There's an interesting discussion going on in this thread with people of faith who are able to see beyond the literal and are obviously capable of giving some considerable thought to their position. With the greatest respect, you're not one of them (I might not be either, so there you go).