Can Science Tell Truth?
I read an interesting quote by Adam Savage, of Mythbuster’s fame. He said the following in a Popular Mechanics podcast:
Like I said, the newspapers talking about evolution versus creationism is very much an attack on science as a type of religion—believing that the scientific method is some type of religious belief. And it’s not! That kind of attack absolutely is damaging science exploration across the whole country. I do think that’s a significant problem. And until we can get our head out of the sand and realize that science isn’t about truth—…
While Adam is a proponent of molecules-to-man evolution, he makes a couple of good points in this quote. He says that the scientific method isn’t “some type of religious belief.” He’s right, too. The scientific method (which is limited to operational science and cannot operate experientially in the area of origins) is a tool. Even so, religious belief does factor into the scientific method. Religious belief is the bias that inherently determines how one interprets the results of the scientific method. These results can provide evidence for vastly different presumptions, whether they be of supernatural creation or or evolutionary naturalism. The problem is that evolutionary naturalism is a religion, a dogma as faith based as any religion. Consider this statement that the famous evolutionist Theodosius Dobzhansky quoted in The American Biology Teacher journal: “Evolution is a light which illuminates all facts, a trajectory which all lines of thought must follow.” Or Michael Dini of Texas Tech University, who refused to give letters of recommendation to students who would not verbally proclaim factuality of evolution. Which brings one to the second part of Adam’s quote.
The second part of the quote, “science isn’t about truth,” is likewise correct. This doesn’t make science useless; far from it!The results of scientific endeavors have greatly benefited the quality of our lives. The point of facts is that scientists don’t know everything, and therefore science deals in theories, both weak and strong, but never in facts, and no matter how strong a theory is, it is always subject to change. Consider the following exchange:
Naturalist: Creation is not science because a creationist’s views were set by the Bible and, therefore, are not subject to change.
Creationist: The reason scientific theories change is because we don’t know everything, isn’t it? We don’t have all the evidence.
Naturalist: Yes, that’s right.
Creationist:But, we will never know everything.
Naturalist: That’s true.
Creationist: We will always continue to find new evidence.
Naturalist: Quite correct.
Creationist: That means we can’t be sure about anything.
Naturalist: Right.
Creationist: That means we can’t be sure about evolution.
Naturalist: Oh, no! Evolution is a fact!
The fact is that science and the scientific method cannot confirm our origins for either creationist or evolutionary naturalist. All it can do affirm what we already believe. For the Christian, that belief is based on the authority of the scriptures and the eye witness account of creation contained therein. For an evolutionary naturalist, there is only the belief that no supernatural force exists… for science does not tell truth.