|A Star Explodes (supernova)|
Scientists only know what they read in the scientific literature.
Religionists only know what they read in the religious literature (The Pillars of Knowledge: Faith and Trust?).
The first post of this series considered some similarities between some of the science and some of the religion in our culture.
In that first post of this series, we compared the vision of doom and the vision of salvation in both religion and in science.
As to science it was written:
Science says our star the sun will destroy the earth in the future, but there is a way out.(Message of Science & Religion - Western). A recent Dredd Blog post considers the long-range dynamics of the current scientific view of the evolution of solar systems, and points out the doom ahead for the planet Earth and all biological life on it (On the Origin of the Genes of Viruses - 8).
We must go into the heavens and find another home planet to live upon.
We must learn to live together here and now, and be decent to this planet in the interim.
Looking forward we must develop space travel technology but we must solve social problems now. Because our final trip into heaven is a very, very long time from now.
While we develop the space travel technology we must sustain a habitable planet until we do launch that final trip of salvation.
If we do not travel into the heavens our fate will be determined when
the sun eventually turns the inner four planets of this solar system
into the fires of hell.
As to the aspect of religion in the comparison it was written:
Religion talks of potential Armageddon but those who are good will be spared, those who are good will go into heaven to a better home.(ibid). For a long time the way civilization has looked at the scientific version and the religious version has been classified as "doomer" or "end of the world" wacko ideology.
It generally teaches us that the golden rule is to be good to each other treating one another as we would be treated. If we do not there will be a hell instead of a heaven.
Yet, there is the ancient story of a danger of global destruction:
"For there will be trouble then worse than there has ever been from the beginning of the world until now, and there will be nothing like it again! Indeed, if the length of this time had not been limited, no one would survive; but for the sake of those who have been chosen, its length will be limited."(Matt. 24:21-22, CJB, emphasis added). Which we might poo poo as "The End Is Coming" scorn of "doomers," a reaction has been in fashion for quite some time.
Now, in hindsight, it seems to have been prescient (What Kind of Intelligence Is Prescience? - 2), especially in the modern scientific light of global warming induced climate change (Agnotology: The Surge - 8).
Interestingly, the religious concept of Armageddon, or its hangover, has fashioned Western Foreign Policy for over a century (see e.g. The Universal Smedley - 2, Viva Egypt - 2).
Since the scientific elite of Western Civilization now see the real potential for this calamity to happen, the widespread "the end scorn" is likely to become less fashionable (CSER, FOHI, FOLI, Krugman on IPCC Reports), especially as the denial proves to be more and more fanciful as catastrophes increase.
Thus, the scientific-socio-political search for remedies is replacing the scorn and denial of the actual reality of the already here, and yet still approaching, catastrophes.
As to the bottom line of the comparisons for remedies in religion and science:
That is essentially the same story told by two factions, but the how it is done is where the two stories drift far apart.(ibid, Message of Science & Religion - Western). The same criticism of science by religionists, and criticism of religion by scientists, is interesting.
Science teaches us we must physically do it ourselves, but religion in a
general sense teaches us that we are to be saved by metaphysical
Scientists fault religionists for being overly mythological and foretelling inaccurately, while religionists fault scientists for making up "the myth" of approaching climate catastrophe, and also for foretelling inaccurately.
There are other interesting similarities, such as new stars and a new Earth ("For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind." - Isa. 65:17) which dove-tails with the Big Bang theory of new stars and planets (On the Origin of the Genes of Viruses - 6, On the Origin of the Genes of Viruses - 5).
These origin of entities postulations are interesting to contemplate in terms of non-carbon-based life forms, in that, some religious writings indicate that there are beings who are not composed of matter, i.e. not composed of atoms and molecules, as carbon-based life forms are.
There is the story of a destructive war in the heavens involving beings of that sort:
"And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him."(Rev. 12:7-9). Which we might compared to the big bang explosion and subsequent ongoing destruction of stars, planets, and life on those planets (On the Origin of the Genes of Viruses - 8).
Substantial numbers of religionists and scientists also have ideologies that see superior beings as a source of a solution (Will Humans Evolve Into Machines?, Will Humans Evolve Into Super Beings?, Will Humans Evolve "Further"?), while the scientists add artificial intelligence as another source of a solution (MIRI).
For the many empires and civilizations of history that suffered catastrophe, scientists find that type of catastrophe to be historically common (On The Origin of Catastrophe), and religious writings also detail the fall of empires and civilizations aplenty (e.g. Sodom & Gomorrah, Babylon, Hittites, Egypt, Tyre & Sidon, etc.).
However, both science and religion find that human solutions to such problems are not as common as the catastrophes are.
Nevertheless, in the 450 some-odd Christian denominations many non-human solutions are advanced.
By the same token, in the 97% consensus of scientists who agree that the solution is fossil fuels remaining in the ground from now on, some scientists also see that such a scientific "solution" is not really a solution in the political sense.
Because, as to the latter, scientists have no political power, however, Oil-Qaeda induced denialism does (The Exceptional American Denial).
And so here we are in an advanced scientific world with religion saying that science is imagining things (religionists generally believe God will destroy civilization, i.e., human activity won't), and here we are where religionists currently have greater political power than scientists do.
The next post in this series is here, the previous post in this series is here.