Christians and Christian Organizations in Science

[Canuckster1127]

I'm establishing this thread as a means to provide information on Christians who are active in the realm of science.

Others please feel free to add information as you see fit.

Of course, the first and most obvious to point out is the host of this site, Rich Deem. Other OEC sites exist too which Rich has referenced on his main page at http://www.godandscience.org

This may be interest to many.

James H. Leuba did a survey of a statistically significant sector of the scientific community in 1914 and 1933. The results of teh 1914 survey were published in The Belief in God and Immortality: A Psychological, Anthropological and Statistical Study (Boston:Sherman, French, 1916), 224-25. The surveys were repeated by others in 1996 and 1998.

Here's what the results show.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... i_19332942

New study reveals the percentage of scientists who believe in God is the same as 1916 count
Jet, April 21, 1997
The same percentage of scientists believe in God today as did some 81 years ago, a new study shows.

The new study conducted by noted historian Edward J. Larson of the University of Georgia in Athens asked 1,000 scientists including biologists, physicists and mathematicians, if they believed in God.

Some 40 percent of the scientists said they do believe in God. The number is the same percentage found in the famous 1916 survey conducted by noted psychologist James Leuba.

Leuba thought belief in God would drop among scientists as education improved, but he didn't have any polling evidence to support that claim, said Larson.

That's why Larson took another look at it in the new study, which is designed to reproduce the 1916 project. The new results are published in the journal, Nature.

Larson's survey followed the same procedure as the 1916 study. Like Leuba, he drew 1,000 names randomly from a reference book of American scientists, choosing biologists for half of his sample and splitting the remainder among mathematicians and physicists or astronomers.

The recent survey also excluded other scientists like ecologists and geologists.

Both surveys give a strict definition of God as one who communicates with mankind and is the one who people can pray to "in expectation of receiving an answer."

About 15 percent of the scientists polled in the 1916 study and the current survey said they were agnostic or had "no definite belief."

So, over the last 80 years, the composition of belief, unbelief and agnosticism within the scientific community has remained pretty much constant, but also the percentage of disbelief is higher than the general population. Whether thats a direct correlation or causation relationship is open to debate, as the same may be true of other fields of study, but it is something to consider and look at.

I would argue that part of the cause for this can be attributed in part to the a significant segment of the religious community defining belief in a way that precludes science period and when unbelievers see things defined in that manner it can tend to drive them away. Obviously though, that is not the only way to look at it.

Another article shows that there is a shift in terms of the distribution of such unbelief among the disciplines. In 1916 Biologists were the least believing. In 1996 that was held by Physicists and astronomers. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... i_20121068

Thoughts or comments?

[Gman]

I would argue that part of the cause for this can be attributed in part to the a significant segment of the religious community defining belief in a way that precludes science period and when unbelievers see things defined in that manner it can tend to drive them away. Obviously though, that is not the only way to look at it.

I would totally agree with that... Not to point a finger, but I think many of the scientists are simply disgusted with the way science could be so tweaked to fit a certain viewpoint, (and rightly so). On top of this I think that when they think of God or the Bible it automatically conjures up political groups like the Republican party or big business... It's no wonder why many of them are probably more reactionary than not....

Another article shows that there is a shift in terms of the distribution of such unbelief among the disciplines. In 1916 Biologists were the least believing. In 1996 that was held by Physicists and astronomers. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... i_20121068

Thoughts or comments?

Bart, I remember another post by you that claimed the rift was actually higher among geneticists or is this the same survey?

[Cross.eyed]

I would totally agree with that... Not to point a finger, but I think many of the scientists are simply disgusted with the way science could be so tweaked to fit a certain viewpoint, (and rightly so). On top of this I think that when they think of God or the Bible it automatically conjures up political groups like the Republican party or big business... It's no wonder why many of them are probably more reactionary than not....

Exactly, and then the tweaking gets tweaked and the scientists who don't get tossed.
It has gotten so bad that when I open my sock drawer I fully expect the socks to be organized in small groups each getting snarky with the others not about color but the perceived "holes" in the others "theories."

I think the OP is a great idea, we could learn more about what science is saying/doing that has an effect on how we believe and especially when we mix science with our belief. The thread about Mary Schweitzer(spelling) being doubted in her findings by others because of her belief in GOD is a good example. Thank you Canuckster

[Canuckster1127]

I would argue that part of the cause for this can be attributed in part to the a significant segment of the religious community defining belief in a way that precludes science period and when unbelievers see things defined in that manner it can tend to drive them away. Obviously though, that is not the only way to look at it.

I would totally agree with that... Not to point a finger, but I think many of the scientists are simply disgusted with the way science could be so tweaked to fit a certain viewpoint, (and rightly so). On top of this I think that when they think of God or the Bible it automatically conjures up political groups like the Republican party or big business... It's no wonder why many of them are probably more reactionary than not....

Another article shows that there is a shift in terms of the distribution of such unbelief among the disciplines. In 1916 Biologists were the least believing. In 1996 that was held by Physicists and astronomers. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... i_20121068

Thoughts or comments?

Bart, I remember another post by you that claimed the rift was actually higher among geneticists or is this the same survey?

Gman,

You're right. I did say earlier that Biologists had a higher incidence of unbelief. That was a result of a faulty memory on my part. This information is the source and corrects it.

Bart

[Canuckster1127]

This is a Gallup Poll that was performed in 1982, 1991, 1993, 1997, 1999 and 2001. I've taken it from the Book, "Where Darwin Meets the Bible, Creationists and Evolutionists in America, by Larry Witham, Oxford, 2002, pg 274

The responses in Gallup for the Public were pretty much all the same in every year taken. The numbers below are specifically from the 1997 poll. The scientist numbers were taken in a separate poll of 1,000 scientists, conducted by Larry Witham in 1996. The 1,000 scientists were comprised of a random sample of which 50% were biologists, 25% physicists and astronomers, and 25% mathemeticians. There was a 60% response rate.

Here' how the results compared and the questions and the percentage of the public and scientists who agreed with the statements.


1. Man developed over millions of years from less developed forms of life. God had no part in this process.
Scientists 55% Public 10%

2. Man developed over million of years from less advanced forms of life, but God guided this process, including mankind's creation.
Scientists 40% Public 39%

3. God created man pretty much in his present form at one time within the last 10,000 years.

Scientists 5% Public 44%

What do you think this means?

[zoegirl]

I think it's a combination of ignorance of scientific terms and also a misunderstanding of philosophy and theology.

I think the majority of the public is vastly undereducated in science and also have a idea borne from early sunday school of what it means to believe in Genesis (compounded by those in some circles who insist that to drift from YEC is tantamount to apostasy). Thus the resting on the old "I learned it in sunday school"

I also think that many scientists in the first category are under the idea that proving evolution is equal to disproving the existence of God. Also, I think, because of the insistence from some that God could not have used a mechanism.

[David Blacklock]

Excellent post, Bart. Some say it's easy to lie with statistics and that's certainly true. All data that humans touch may be a little (or a lot) tainted by our bias and some of this is beyond our control. But it's hard to beat evidence that is gathered with all the care we can muster. Your surveys showed the quality of repeatability over various time frames in the US. In my opinion, it's easier to lie without valid statistics than with them.

DB