If Science Cannot Explain How the Universe Appeared, Religion Cannot Either, a Scientist Said

Richard Dawkins, the famous evolutionary biologist and best-selling author that’s more known for his dogmatic atheism and strong exchanges with various religious leaders, stated that religion would not be able to uncover long-standing mysteries of the Universe the science field cannot either.

This leaves the matter of the Universe’s inception, potentially unanswerable. Richard Dawkins has written a few books, which are mainly considering science and the systems of the natural world but also based on atheism and the problem of God.

Matter and Antimatter

Determined in his belief that there is no God, Dawkins states that even though it may be true, science may never be able to answer what of how the Universe was created, and it doesn’t give religion the chance to do so either.

Last week, research published in the acclaimed journal Nature explained an experiment performed in Japan that provides hope in unveiling some clues about the Universe’s inception.

Researchers that carried out the study used neutrinos for the analysis, which are subatomic particles that showed up in significant numbers fractions of a second after the Big Bang. The team found more fluctuations in neutrinos than in antineutrinos, implying that the two do not act as mirror images of each other, but actually behave in a different way.

The team of scientists believes this is a rather strong hint in the pursuit to understand the way matter outran antimatter following the birth of the Universe. The concept that something came from nothing, a main aspect of religion, and the way it tries to answer to the creation question is strongly disapproved by science.

Answering the Long-Standing Question

Most religions believe that God created the Universe, and contemporary Abrahamic ones, such as Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, are the most supportive of this. However, other beliefs, such as Buddhism, say that there is no beginning or end to the Universe. Buddhism believes there is no creator god, but Hinduism, for instance, is not that clear on this matter.

Science hasn’t been able to reveal the way the Universe was created. The closest thing it has discovered is the Big Bang, which is a cosmological pattern of the observable Universe from its youngest-known periods, through its evolution.

However, the theory only explains things from after the creation and not what happened before. This has left numerous religions, usually combining pseudo-science and reason that God started the processes occurring in the Big Bang.

Last month, during an interview with The Sun, Professor Dawkins severed such a claim.

He said: “It’s difficult and I’m not a physicist. I’m a biologist, but I’ve read what the physicists say. The first thing to say is that it’s another of these gaps where even if science can’t answer it, it doesn’t mean religion can. There’s absolutely no reason to think that because science can’t answer a particular question, therefore religion can.”

If science is not able or it won’t ever be able to discover such a long-standing question, religion cannot answer it either, the scientist concluded.

Related Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments (2)

  1. The title should be obvious but is denied by most. When you stand back and look at religion, they basically come up with an imaginary story that requires magic and no evidence. Just look at Scientology if you want an extreme example. The point is it can be just about anything you can imagine and outrageous is not beyond acceptable. It is not impossible that one of these religions is actually close to correct, but that would be by pure random accident and nothing divine. I’ll put my money on science to answer these types of questions, if answers are ever forthcoming.

  2. Science will triumph because it freely develops with life, and the framework for the development of religion is tight.
    There are some reasons (see ukraine.exrus.eu/en/19.php for details) to believe that the Abrahamic god is simply the law of physics, which compels quite complex and enough open systems to develop and to become more complex by themselves.
    An experiment to test this hypothesis ( abiogenesis.mria.top/abiogenesis-munich18.html) can be put in the coming years. In case of success (creation of replicators from inorganic initial components), this will be a victory for atheism and a new (experimental!) proof of god (but not God) existence. Is not it funny? 🙂