Ah... the forced (mythical) battle between two comrades: faith and science.
A somewhat tiresome battle it is at that. So much polemics is spilled through ink and other media to talk about this hypothetical battle between science and religion. A quick search through a Reddit subforum, or possibly a show like "Cosmos", would reveal to me that there are atheists and agnostics trying to preach this crusade of science over religion. The sad part is:
it isn't just a one-sided war.
Many atheists such as Richard Dawkins, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Daniel Dennet, Steven Pinker, and the late great Christopher Hitchens (if these names are not redundant by now, then maybe it is time to play catch-up and start reading these fellows, particularly Hitchens who I am honestly a bit of a fan of and have never encountered a man argue from the wrong side in such a compelling way; a man of great argumentation.) enjoy making the claim that religion is just a form of God goggles that block out reality and science and just help people to feel good and to see things their their God lenses. Honestly, they are right about some of us. I know them personally. Thankfully, it isn't every person of faith.
I was debating with myself about what to blog about, and a couple topics came to mind. I got thrown a curveball, and here the subject stands before you. I was at a relative's house for Easter and I was rudely eavesdropping on a conversation I was not welcomed into: one person claiming they listened to a seminar from a Christian "somebody" who made the (never dying) claim that carbon dating can be difficult to determine, based off the different variables that can set off a date. Therefore, ipso facto, the Earth is not 4.5 billion years old, but can safely be assumed to be the 6,000 year old figure that a Christian "somebody" determined. I have heard the same "seminar" given by different people at different times. Also, the fact that I was reading through Genesis 1-9, the topic was so deep in my mind that I wanted to throw my two cents into the... equation...?
Can I just set the record straight?
Even if the Earth is not 4.5 billion years old and is younger than that by some miscalculation of a misread carbon dating calculation, it is unreasonable to assume that the misreading can easily make the jump from 4.5 billion to 6,000. One might say that the number is greatly extended to cover up the so-called truth of Christian revelation and the time of our existence. That isn't at all how the scientific community operates, and anybody who actually is interested in science and the new data that unfolds as time goes on would quickly discern that. That isn't something that we are dealing with, at least right now.
There was a time, when I was cautious around science and the data that scientists claim to be points of fact or "plausible theories". As a Catholic, it isn't something I even need to worry about anymore. On the contrary, I can actually take an interest in the data that scientists discover and apply it to my faith. I do not need to fret when atheists trumpet 4.5 billion years on their trumpets. I do not fret.
If there is scientific data to provide evidence that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, that we humans evolved from a lower form of life into the beings we are today, the universe had a beginning or not- then that is what I will go with. Many religious leaders, both Catholic and non, more or less accept this same stance. Why shouldn't they?
Faith and religion that are truly good are not locked inside themselves where their truth cannot be understood through reason or nature. If your faith is absolutely true, then we need to be able to discern some ramifications and natural causality in the universe. How can it be true if you are worried about what scientific data may show?
I can sense it coming:
"Well then, Fro... since you clearly do not believe what the bible says, what then do you believe in?"
The question has been thrown my way during these conversations. The problem is the question itself is wrong.
Part 2 sometime.
Also, apologies for the title- it was either that or "Who's got two thumbs and loves faith and science? THIS GUY!"