Home| Letters| Links| RSS| About Us| Contact Us

On the Frontline

What's New

Table of Contents

Index of Authors

Index of Titles

Index of Letters

Mailing List

subscribe to our mailing list:


Critique of Intelligent Design

Evolution vs. Creationism

The Art of ID Stuntmen

Faith vs Reason

Anthropic Principle

Autopsy of the Bible code

Science and Religion

Historical Notes


Serious Notions with a Smile


Letter Serial Correlation

Mark Perakh's Web Site

Science and Religion

Letter to the International Journal of Cardiology
Dr. Avijit Roy, the editor of the outstanding two-language (Bengali and English) pro-science website Mukto-Mona, in a letter a copy of which is posted here reveals the preposterous attempts by a group of pseudo-scientists to "prove" that Quran and other Islamic sources allegedly contained valid medical information.
Roy, Dr. Avijit ;
published: Feb 05, 2010

Francis Collins and the God of the Gaps
Matt Young discusses the thesis of altruism among humans as an alleged pointer to religious beliefs, as evinced by Francis Collins.
Young, Matt;
published: Jul 19, 2009

Seeing and Believing
Reviewing the recently published books by Karl Giberson and Kenneth Miller, professor Jerry Coyne discusses whether or not religion and science are compatible (in his view, they are not). (Off-site link.)
Coyne, Jerry ;
published: Jan 25, 2009

Religion and skepticism: can (and should!) skeptics challenge religion?
In this essay Dr. Norman Hall and Lucia Hall offer a discussion of what the essence of science is and how it differs from religion. The Halls combine in their essay their extensive knowledge and understanding of the scientific method with an ability to clarify sophisticated subjects, such as Bayesian probabilistic analysis, in a form easily comprehensible to a non-professional audience. They argues that science, if pursued in a consistent way, leads to an atheistic world view, which, though, not only does not undermine the incentives for a moral behavior, but on the contrary, provides a better foundation than religions for moral values.
Hall, Lucia K. B. ; Hall, Dr. Norman F.;
published: Jan 06, 2004

Is the war between science and religion over?
The complicated relationship between science and religion has been the subject of numerous discussions, with a variety of views proposed by authors, from assertions that science and religion are hopelessly at odds and can never be reconciled to the opposite asseverations, suggesting that there is not now and never can be any contradiction between faith (of whatever persuasion) and the facts of science. The essay by Dr. Norman Hall and Lucia Hall treats the religion vs. science controversy from the standpoint of reason and humanistic values. It was originally published in 1986 but preserves its relevance to present day debates related to the controversy in question. It is posted here in order to provide a well deserved wider audience to that well-thought-of discussion.
Hall, Lucia K. B. ; Hall, Dr. Norman F.;
published: Jan 05, 2004

A Philosophical Premise of 'Naturalism'?
Intelligent Design advocates complain that science is unjustifiably based on the philosophical underpinning of naturalism. Although science does make some assumptions that might be considered naturalistic in a sense, the assumptions that science is based on are not as restrictive as creationists claim. Furthermore, the proponents of intelligent design make exactly the same assumptions in their own work. This article shows that the complaint about naturalism is applied unfairly to discredit only those parts of science that naturalism's critics oppose on ideological grounds.
Isaak, Mark;
published: Oct 03, 2002

Incompatible Magisteria
In this article the principal difference between the attitudes of science and religion to the comprehension of reality is analyzed. It is also argued that the approach typical of crank science is akin to that of religion. As an example, William Dembski's concept of "inflationary fallacy" is discussed and shown to be applicable to the Intelligent Design theory itself. The latter, is argued, lacks both explanatory power and independent evidence. The conclusion is that, unlike science which is based on evidence and reason, religions with their numerous variations and conflicting sets of beliefs, all not based on evidence, provide no reasons to be trusted, and such descendants of religion as the Intelligent Design "theory" do not belong in genuine science.
Perakh, Mark;
published: Sep 04, 2002

Has Science Found God?
Why does the claimed convergence of science and religion not hold up under scrutiny? Science has always explained observations in terms of natural (that is, nonsupernatural) phenomena. Religion has always proposed supernatural explanations to fill those gaps where science provided no natural explanations, or simply remained silent. Only one domain of existence has ever been occupied in either case - the domain of human observations.
Stenger, Victor J. ;
published: Sep 09, 2002