Okay, so I frequent an online chat room moderated by youtube apologist/egomaniac Shockofgod. I have to say about him and the experiences I've had with other atheists and christians there, but there's just one small point that strikes me as odd.
It seems to me that, at least in that forum, the longer a religious discussion goes on, the more likely it is that it will tend to become a Physics discussion... in other words, not a religious discussion. I think this is odd because physics is a field of study that the average person knows little to nothing about. I'm going to be taking Physics in college next semester, and I personally wouldn't have been eligible to sign up for it if I didn't have adequate grades in Calculus (and I suspect that the courses I took in Chemistry will come in handy too). Consequently, I'm amazed that your average joe christian who lacks formal education (and might even be adverse to "evil" colleges) feels that, after reading a couple articles on *enter website here,* they are an expert on the subject qualified enough to ram their "knowledge" down other people's throats and ignore all opposition. So, if you ever want to live through the surreal experience of being lectured on the intricate details of a field of study as complicated as fucking PHYSICS by a thirteen year old christian apologist who owes his confidence to a couple articles found on Answers In Genesis, then by all means, go visit Shockofgod's online chat room.
So why Physics? I'll tell you why; it's a copout. It's a cover for an otherwise general lack of evidence of the existence of any god. For instance, you'll hear numerous modern christians opining that their god is "beyond mankind's capacity of understanding" or that he "exists somewhere outside the universe." Well here's something to consider: NOBODY knows what exists outside the universe. Isn't awfully revealing that apologists cherry-pick some intellectual grey-area and plant their god there, all the while professing absolute confidence in their being correct? Why not plant a god in a place that humans have significantly more knowledge of? The answer is this: It's been done before. Once you understand that religious types once said that gods lived on mountains (before we explored them), and then they said that they lived in the sea (before we explored it), and then they said they lived somewhere in the sky, or space (before telescopes or before we understood exactly what clouds, the sun, and the moon are), and NOW some of them say that god exists somewhere "outside" the universe, then you've discovered what I call the "retreating god" dilemma. Every time we learn something new, the discussion changes. And now it's physics. Well, whatever.
My first exposure to Physics was in my junior year of high school. I never thought it'd be relevant to my career in the future, so I skimmed by with B's and C's. I wasn't the only one; in general, the entire class seemed indifferent to Physics. If only I or my instructor knew that the key to getting adolescents interested in Physics is religion, then maybe I would have invested more interest in the subject.
Anyway, in the interest of making this a discussion instead of a rant, have any of you had this experience before? Better yet, have any of you ever felt that a christian could convert you with a Physics related subject like the Big Bang? I ask because I've met christians who claim to have been atheist who became christians once they "learned" about physics.
It tends to happen on both sides. This is, generally speaking, why I avoid discussing science with Christians at nearly all costs. First and foremost, I am not a scientist. While my elementary and high school careers saw me do well in both math and science (I was an electrical engineering major at a prominent vocational school and spent 3 years competing in US First Robotics. I took physics, chemistry and calculus.) I abandoned science after high school in favour of a more Humanities based education (though I was very close to doing a chemistry/mathematics double major).
The problem is that most people, religious or not, are also not scientists and are often fairly inadequate at explaining anything about it. They can regurgitate things they read off of a website or know all of Carl Sagan's speeches verbatim but all of their knowledge is by rote. They can't often explain WHY something is the way it is. Science is hard, it isn't something that you can pick up in a week of surfing Wikipedia. It isn't something that you can be an expert in no matter how many of Dawkins' or Hawking's books you have read. Because science is hard, people look for the simple rote knowledge that they can spew and seem to know what they are talking about. In communities which will then look to impress the other side with what seems to be in depth technical knowledge.
Yes, in fairness I should acknowledge that I have witnessed non-religious types make some astounding claims with unfounded certainty. Intellectual dishonesty is a characteristic shared by people of all kinds.
But human nature is weird, sometimes it's as if the less you know about something, the more certain you are of your understanding of it
Bear in mind that I have seen people on both sides of the table play this game. I can't count how many skeptics I have discussed things with who act like they were in the lab when the Human Genome Project finally sequenced human DNA. In my experience it isn't religion, but egotism, which leads to being overly assumptive about their own skills with science. The more sure someone is about being correct in their general worldview the more likely they are to fudge the details. This leads to Young Earth Creationists misusing things like the second law of thermodynamics or skeptics who are unable to explain current models for cosmogenesis despite the fact that both sides try.
Thanks for the advice about the third law! People bring up the second law to me all the time.
You know it's truly cold when the Kelvin scale becomes more relatable than Celsius. :)
Fyi: The ocean and gulfstream proximity makes it so that it doesn't get too cold where the majority of people live. Winters in Oslo are generally -5 to +5 until end of January and -5 to -25 until mid March at the latest (though they have been colder the last 5 years due to climate change). The social convention is that -10 is when you can start complaining.