Science and Religion Are Not Compatible

Science and Religion Are Not Compatible

Nearly two decades ago, the late biologist Stephen Jay Gould said that
science and religion were two separate things. He called them
“non-overlapping magisteria”, or NOMA. He said that science
could answer what happened,
and how it happened. But the why it happened, and the morals and implications of it,
those were the purview of religion. A lot of people believe that he was right.
I mean, obviously there are a lot of great scientists out there
who also happen to be religious. They found a way to reconcile the two worlds pretty well,
at least in their own minds. Or they just learned to
compartmentalize it really well. But I don’t think those two worlds
are actually compatible. I think if you’re a
devoutly religious person, and someone who accepts
the scientific method, something’s gotta give.
Whenever science succeeds, religion loses, because a gap of knowledge
that was once unknown, has now been filled by
something that’s not God. Part of the problem
with NOMA is that science actually does have something
to say about morality. I’ll talk about that in a second. And we know religion has plenty to say
about what happened and how things happened. The magisteria overlap
all the time. And they can’t both be true. Religions make claims about
the natural world all the time. Not just about the afterlife,
but about how our current world actually works. Creationists do this, saying the world is 6,000
years old, and that humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time, and there was
a great flood. People who believe God
performs miracles do this — they say that God healed somebody in a way
science can’t never possibly explain. These are testable claims — and they have been tested.
And religion had lost every single time. We know the universe isn’t 6,000 years old.
The evidence for that is overwhelming. We know intercessory prayer — when you pray for
someone who doesn’t know you’re praying for them — has no statistically
significant effect. We know literal actual
miracles don’t happen. You know, if someone’s cured
of some disease, there’s either a scientific
explanation for it… or, if we don’t have one at the moment, I would bet
good money that we would have a good scientific explanation, if only we had a little more knowledge
than we do right now. And, like I said, science does have
something to say about morality. Sam Harris wrote an entire book about
this very concept. It’s called The Moral Landscape. One of the ideas he talks about in the book
is about how science can actually tell you what increases and
decreases people’s pleasure, and we can work in our lives to make sure
the good stuff happens more often. And I’m just skimming
the surface here. The point is that science and religion
don’t occupy different worlds. The point is that science and religion
don’t occupy different worlds. They’re in this together. And I believe we have to choose
one or the other. Do you put your faith
in evidence… or faith? The choice seems
pretty obvious to me. Don’t get me wrong: There are brilliant scientists
out there who stick to science in the lab, but who still hold
the belief in God. They accept the evidence for evolution,
but believe God put the whole process in motion. They accept the Big Bang,
but believe God started it all. They run controlled
experiments in the lab, but believe in God because
of a feeling they have. I think all of that is just
intellectually dishonest. And it only gets worst the more devout
you are with a specific religion. I don’t think you can actually believe
Jesus was born from a virgin mother if you actually understand
and accept how biology works. You can’t believe that Muhammad
flew to heaven on a winged horse, because pretty much all of that
is physically impossible. You can’t believe Jesus
rose from the dead, if you understand how death works.
It doesn’t work that way. You get the idea. This notion that
science and religion are truly compatible, it sounds nice, but is an idea that it’s just
well past its expiration date. You can say
you believe in both, but don’t expect people to
take you seriously if you do. My name is Hemant Mehta and I write
at Leave a comment below and we’ll sure
to check it out. And don’t forget to subscribe.

You may also like


  1. I believe Tim Minchin made a good point on why science and religion should not be compared, if you're interested, watch 'Storm'.

  2. This is some tragically small minded idea about religion. Sure, dogmatism is contradicted by reality, no doubt, and old religions are chock full of myths which are quite literally wrong. But who is to say that Darwin did not expose part of the holy mechanisms by which reality manifests? I get depressed when so-called atheists think they have discovered a pure truth. There is no pure truth within our comprehension.
    Let's not let the liberating awakening of Atheists become frozen in a new dogmatism. There is so much more to know, partly with senses we do not yet have.
    Keep your mind open or lose it.

  3. Try telling that to Michael DeBakey, Avicenna, Albert Einstein, Sir Isaac Newton, Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilee, Lise Meitner (she converted to Christianity as an adult), or most other scientists. Being very religious people, they made major contributions to medicine and physics. I have yet to name all the other pious influential scientists.

  4. The problem with scientists who believe in the Evolution theory and god, is that evolution goes against everything the bible says. Just like Hemants says, religion and science don't mix. Even if the scientists do not have a religion but just believe in god and the Evolution theory, the chances of god actually existing are about the same as the chances of reversing your age. If you're religious, it's already blind faith, but if you believe in the evolution theory and just god, it's blind faith, period.

  5. There's a complacency of the Understanding of Nature, despite this Understanding bringing us the technical advances we enjoy.  Many people are unable to use critical thinking on how important this link to science & technology is.  & it would also help if people would stop choosing which science is convenient for them to accept.

    How can people reject evolution, a pillar of biology, but still trust medical doctors?

  6. I was reading "The God Delusion" but I got stuck at the NOMA part, I had a lot of questions. Thanks for solving them for me 🙂

  7. Why are Atheists so obsessed with science anyways? More then half off the bible is not making any statements about the world we live in but rather is a an old hebrew law book. Regardless of the fact that nobody except really fundementalists jews want to follow this rules criticizing the bible because it has non official fiction in it is kinda like saying that you should criticize all of Greek philosophy just because of one and two unscientific statements.

    Well lets just be thank full that the USA constitution does not have some ancient myth spliced into it some were or else we would have the same kind of people ridiculing it for the same reason.

  8. According to all religious people, God created science. No matter what, us Atheist will be wrong from the religious nut jobs. Every answer from them is that God did it. Like you said, it them just trying hoping that "god" (yes, lower case) exists.

  9. Mr Hemant Mehta here's the deal about God, God has done miracles by healing people and other things I've seen it and experienced it myself, now here's your problem you're trying so hard not to believe in the existence of God and how he created everything that every time you hear someone give a story about how God healed them you run to some science book to figure out your own answers for it because everything to you is science science science reality check: science don't have all that power science didn't create the universe and all the planets and kept it in order and evolution is science fiction lies humans didn't come from apes God created humans plants and animals and everything natural thing on the face of the earth. But I'm not trying to stop keep believing in science, that's why your face looks like it's full stress probably all that science studies over packed your brain

  10. To be honest, the only thing that I see is potentially a problem as to why religion and science don't mix is the origin of the universe and evolution. But even then, evolution was never discussed in any religious text nor was it denied that it occurred. And as for the origin of the universe, isn't it feasible arguement for religious people to say that God created the big bang?
    Personally, I'm a moderate muslim who greatly follows science. I don't question the findings of science, and I don't see how the two are oil and water. I believe in evolution and the big bang theory, so I personally do think science and religion (specifically islam) can mix.

  11. Mr. Mehta has a great attitude in this video. He presents his thoughts without demonizing those that disagree with him. Repeatedly he prefaces his statements with, "I think…", which indicates a humble attitude.

    I would disagree with the substance of his arguments, however. He said, for example, that "when science wins, religion loses". This is really a naive attitude toward science and religion. The discovery of various constants and quantities in the laws of physics, such as the gravitational constant, the weak nuclear force, and the expansion rate of the universe, have arisen to the Fine Tuning Argument for God's Existence. Without the advances of science, that argument would never have been developed. The Borde-Guth-Vilenkin Theorem has provided the proof for the absolute beginning of the cosmos, an essential element of the Kalam Cosmological Argument for God's Existence. Also, whenever science wins, religion loses? How did the discovery of penicillin hurt religion? How about advances in space flight? These examples alone show that religion doesn't lose whenever science wins.

    Mr. Mehta goes on to show that particular religious beliefs have been proven false or inadequate, and intends to show that this is science dealing blows to religion. Is it a blow to science when particular scientific theories are disproven? Showing that some human being's claims about God turned out to be wrong does nothing to show that there is no God in the same way that showing a particular scientist's claims about the natural world are wrong does nothing to show that science doesn't work.

    Mr. Mehta goes on to say, "we know that actual miracles don't happen." There are two problems with this. First, there are no scientific experiments that could prove a claim like this. Mr. Mehta makes the audacious claim, but provides no evidence to back it up. The second problem is the irony. Ironically this is a blind-faith based philosophical position called Naturalism. Mr. Mehta believes this is true simply because he wants it to be true. At best Mr. Mehta should make a more modest claim such as, "I don't know if miracles happen." Once he starts to claim that they don't, or probably don't, happen he has made a claim that he needs to back up.

    Mr. Mehta tries to quote Sam Harris as an example of science providing us morality, but fails to deal with the insufficiency of Sam Harris's philosophy. Sam Harris said that whatever contributes to human flourishing is moral, and so science can demonstrate what contributes to human flourishing. Why should we think, on atheism, that human flourishing is the highest moral good? Why not the flourishing of algae or manatees? Why are humans so special? And on atheism, what grounds do we have for saying that the flourishing of life is morally good at all? There doesn't seem to be any objective reason for such a claim, and neither Mr. Mehta nor Sam Harris have been able to provide one.

    I'll leave my comments here, but I hope anyone who has bothered to read this, Theist or Atheist, will critically think through comments made in this arena. All too often people stand boldly on baseless claims.

  12. Science and religion are two separate things. There is no conflict for me there. The Bible never claimed to be a science book. Science shows me how our universe works, not why..

    But science have helped opening some gaps which leads to the conclusion that God exist. That's my view anyway. I love science.

  13. Hi. I will be posting a response video on my very small channel in a day or so.. I was looking for a clip like this. First I went to the Amazing Atheist. I have to say that he talks on and on but really doesn't seem to say anything. I then discovered your video. As I said, I don't agree with it, but I do want you to know that I appreciate your style. You aren't ranting and are concise. I think at the end of this video you say that you're friendly, and you do seem to be. (I'm going to mention that in the video)

  14. the why is God created the big bang by speaking everything into existence. God created science we are in that bubble playing with his creation that is why you atheists think your disproving God however your just crediting him for his brilliance of mathematics and precision of knowledge. All of your crap your talking does not add up when you are able to explain how everthing was created without God then you will win. However that will never happen cause you CANNOT ! LOL GOD WINS ONCE AGAIN!

  15. Your science is just another religion and innaccurate to real truths…just being screamed loud as you can u exclaim your theories which are not fact…a shame that atheists try to take away peoples choice to believe.

  16. there is a big difference between and MAIN OF FAITH and a MAN OF RELIGION, religion is very much man made, man made views and ideals…….. unfortunately science doesn't explain ALOT OF THINGS also, science is very man made in its self, and its based off theories created by a man, much like religion creates its views….. once you drop all the labels, and ethnic labels, and skin tones…. and just say you human, be positive and be a good person….. u then understand what its like to be a MAN OF FAITH.

  17. Reality does not justify itself. Time is something you humans manipulate to conceal your lies. I care not for flat earth or sphere earth. I know the game many play though, and I know why many do not feel their actions truly matter. Much of this comes from science. (Thinking you do not need to stop driving a car or anything to stop the effects of something like global warming as an example; that children or nasa will just solve the issue one day, no problem. World=self entitled twats as a whole) Though i do not want worship, faith or belief. Though I will go through your history and show you humans events like 9/11 and The RMS Titanic are not what you think. Reality does not have to give you the answer, nor will it ever.

    Also, the reality is a women today does not have a baby normally on her own; yes i agree but. we do know scientists can take cells of a creature and create hybrids. Like Mules or Hinnies which are incapable of reproducing. They completely rely on human interference in order to sustain any numbers in the world. Meaning yes, Bull headed humans are actually not far from the truth. We also know the government and/or military technology is highly advanced with Nanomachines. The extreme version of Nanothermite found at the 9/11 site is only able to be made inside a lab. It does not, nor will it ever come from the ground of the earth or sky. This is the ideal thing that is creationism at its core. Reality seems to neither exist nor not exist completely.

    It gets more and more deeper into crossing fact and fiction. Science is fun. Though its fucked with you people. Made you think some twisted shit thats just not real.

    We as people should have more power to control our lives though they refuse to give us freedom and basically laugh at us behind our backs. Fuck the Royals

    Jesus is just your moral understanding of the reality around you. Will you let your children be indoctrinated and kept as puppets to bankers? probably. We are all pretty sleazy fucks just trying to make it in this world.

  18. Science and the bible are extremely compatible. Religion? Not so much. Don't confuse true science vs religion. The bible is extremely against religion. People invented religious extremes not God.

  19. there is no reason to accept this division…faith is trust in what WE KNOW, and deduction as to the most plausible conclusion about what we do not, cannot know. To pretend there is a contradiction is to come with the presupposition that there is no first cause. Studying the mechanisms..will never disprove a cause, it's just bias that leads you there.

  20. Sam Harris's Moral Landscape was universally criticized for missing the mark(and that is being generous),If there is no external way to ground morality, we are forced to deal with the person with the most money and guns telling us what the good is. 93% of war in human history has been for power grabs and greed..and not religiously motivated….mostly under atheist leaders. Try to feel good about that one…human flourishing fails as an objective when you realize …who gets to define what flourishing is…science doesn't solve that.

    Last rant, these lame references to intercessory prayer…get some information of what you criticize…prayer is through out the bible…in every place but one it makes's not a manipulative thing we do to get God to do what we ask's a way of connecting with God and forming our will to His…read what Jesus said as he went to his death…not my will ..but yours. Let's get it straight, those studies are crap and quoting them makes you suspect in your plea for honesty.

  21. I'm sorry mate, but I'm afraid your emotional attachment to your beliefs get in the way of your presentation of the facts, and so your arguments; at least in this video seem less convincing than they could be. You should also try to avoid blanket statements such as "religion loses every time." I am a lover of Truth, and deep down, that is what we are all searching for. If we are prepared to follow Truth no matter where it leads that's when science will truly speak to us. The logic in Saying the big bang caused itself is like saying that the cistene chapel painted itself. And when does an explosion create order? The big bang without a rational cause is like believing I could throw a bomb into a scrapyard and create a Mercedes dealership! Laws do not exist without reason or a cause, nether do the laws of cosmological constant exists without such! And as with all laws, the lawgiver must transcends those laws. True Science actually points towards design, which is why the vast majority of cosmologists have some sort of belief in God.

  22. 1. You are not the atheist voice.
    2. If you think science and religion are incompatible, you haven't understood either of them.
    3. Can't exactly blame you for 2) because we're taught from the very beginning to categorize in right and wrong, this however, is not reflected in the nature of reality. This fact can be interpreted both into scripture (only God can judge; as God, if existent, has disclosure to all the information available) and the definition of the scientific method itself (in short, don't be biased or you'll miss the bigger picture).

    For reference, I have studied Maths and Physics and I do not participate in any kind of religion.
    Nonetheless, if you actually study and compare the two sides (science and religion) you will find a lot of congruence that has only been lost due to people literally becoming judgmental/biased morons who are too lazy to actually study what they are trying to discredit while being too arrogant to admit their ignorance.

  23. Many of your comments/ideas are ridiculously condescending as if the greatest scientific minds of history were idiots because they believed in God. Scientists like Newton and Galileo weren't simply religious, their belief in Christianity DROVE their passion for science

  24. Science and religion are not it the same world.
    Science occupies the real world.
    Religion occupies the fantasy world.


    Check out this link for responses to this video's poor arguments

  26. The problem with this video is two fold 1 Science is limited and what it can answer and how it can answer 2 it's ignorant of history Christianity has never been opposed to science if you atheist would bother to read history you would know this.

  27. This guy said it. Dawkins has said it. And many others. We don't know but science will soon discover it. Upon what do you base this? Is this a belief? A belief on what? A belief must be based upon something? This is called faith. A pocket that was filled with information previously not known. If it's not known then upon what is this "belief" of yours based? By saying we don't know, we have no clue, we don't even know if it can be known, there are son many things we just don't know, but it time we'll discover it and know it. That is faith. No matter how they want to spin it, it's faith.

  28. Science is knowledge based on evidence and facts. Religion is a superstition based on personal beliefs. Hence, religion and science are exactly 0% compatible.

  29. science is a branch of religion. the knowable is a branch of unknowable. the natural a branch of the supernatural. science presupposes things that are not themselves scientific, like math and logic. science can describe gravity, but it can't explain it. science is measurement, religion is storytelling. once needs both to make hypothesis, theories, predictions, etc. atheism is older than monotheism, and closely linked to polytheism and Hinduism, with the idea that nature drives itself. so it's ironic how this prescientific philosophy strongly claims that it's them and them alone that are scientific.

  30. i think that maybe science and religion are compatible but the science dont need the religion the science need time and that is confirmed by a lot of facts in the history of science that is my opinion

  31. There are a lot of evidences found that actually support religion through science. Take a look at the Nephilim, for example.
    The story goes that the sons of God (angels) bedded the daughters of Eve (mankind) and created the Nephilim. An agressive species of Giants. Indeed bones have been found, that would suggest giant humans. I'm not saying they found the Nephilim, but it seems there is a core of truth in these old tales, that have been rewritten countless times and in many forms. Take a look at the ITC-field (paranormal investigation) where evidence of a parallel existence is concluded(this is not a tall tale it is actually true as I can tell you from my own experience). Where this video states "not compatible" truth is that they are coming closer together each day. I believe there is a god and yes, I believe in the evolution-theory. It's called using your brain to think. Only looking at science is ignorant, and blindly running after religion because a book tells you to is even worse. However somewhere in the middle truth can be found or at least concluded. If you can not take that seriously, you're really not that intelligent as you try to seem.

  32. You are quoting those evidence only from the Bible. Why don't you try the Quran, the Scripture which is in perfect agreement with Science? For example, it talks about the Big Bang, expansion of the Universe, embryology, the fingerprints, and many others. In fact, Arab Muslims were in the Golden Age when the West was still in the Middle Ages.

  33. It's man's lack of understanding that Science is "Relative Truth." Religion is "Absolute Truth"
    and they both exist in harmony. One informs us of the Effect: Science. The other informs us of the Cause: Religion. When mans ego gets involved there's incompatibility……

  34. The problem lies in biblical literalism. The other problem is atheists buy into that literalism without being believers. Religion and science are saying the same thing, but in a different voice.

  35. Science proved to me there was a God when i was struggling to believe in anything,you make a lot of statements in your post there,the likes of does intercessary prayer work,science cant prove or disaprove it works,science cant say what happened before the big bang or what was here to cause a big bang,science can surely tell you how you can die,but it cant for 100 percent say Jesus didnt rise from the dead,science years ago said when your dead your dead,today paramedics and ambulancemen and women on a daily basis are bringing people back to life that have been dead,Religion and Science are pretty much the same,a 100 years ago religion would have you burnt at the stake,Science would have had you locked up,if you told either of the 2 in the future there will be a square thing on the wall that you can see threw and see different parts of the world and people will speak on it

  36. The way I see it, Science and Religion can be compatible to some extent. But unless everything in the Religion is true, there will sooner or later in point were they will contradict each other.

    What I'm getting at with this, is that science is all about discovering the truth, while religion is all about teaching its truth (which varies depending on the religion in question). Neither side directly contradicts the other by nature, as there always is a possibility that what the religion teaches is the actual truth…. While since we don't know what the truth is, we can always believe in it like it was any other theory.

    So if anything, its not the concept of religion that is incompatible with science, but rather some of the actual religions. Since most of them make their answers not based on some tests but their understanding of their world (usually with limited knowledge) and superstition…. So many of the religions teachings are bound to be untrue. But then, there is always the chance that some of it can be true in some form, while one can make a religion out of the facts we have proven.

  37. you should do a video on why conspiracy theorists are so hard to argue with. what your feelings about conspiracy theorists?

  38. The bible was written by people. Religious people or at least sane religious people do not deny that. These people lived in a time when science was a lot less evolved so their opinions on the creation of the world weren't really based on science. There are religious people who know that these things like Adam and Eve are not real. There are religious people who just believe that there's a superior power or a "god" who created the universe along with every natural law etc. This has not been disproved. It has not been proved either but even if you think its stupid to believe in something that hasn't been proved, this kind of ideology doesn't come in conflict with science as we know it.

  39. who started the great universities of Europe? Catholic church Christian s drove science forward because they wished to know the mind of God by determining his laws by which nature functions. they attributed their discoveries to God given ability to reason. other faiths (Islam) believe knowing the laws God establishes is impossible and He could just change them at whim anyway and to seek such knowledge is blasphemy. Christians believe God the creator follows the same rules he established and that they are fixed and unchanging. Western science has been by far the most prolific since about 1500 and that is due largely due to religious men pursuing knowledge. the idea that religion and science have always been in conflict is absurd. read some history.

  40. Bible – Birds where created before animals
    Science – Dinosaurs became birds
    Finding – duck like birds lived at the same time as dinosaurs

    Bible – Grass was created before animals
    Science – Dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago – grass started growing 20 million years ago and dinosaurs ate grass?

    Bible – a solid sphere surrounded the earth above the atmosphere
    Science – No such thing has ever existed
    Finding – new ice sheet clouds over Antarctica at the edge of space

  41. as an agnostic i put my money on evidence, but i'm still searching for signs in a sense of evidence of god or supernatural being/power.
    i've heard alot of miracles and supernatural stuff. some are not worthy to put faith in. some make more sense and there is a chance they could be real.

  42. I think that this is a very narrow and scientific understanding of religion. If one assumes that the purpose of religion is to offer an explanation of the natural world, then yes, this would be in conflict with a different process that attempts to offer an explanation of the natural world. 

    But as you quote in the beginning, they provide two non-overlapping magisteria: science, through sensory and empirical data, seeks to explain the natural world, while religion, through experience with the supernatural, philosophy, and consultation with sacred texts, seeks to provide meaning and relationship with a divine power.

    I'm not saying that anyone has to accept that religion is worthwhile or that a divine being necessarily exists. That is not the point. The point is that, for those who do believe, we are talking about two very different epistemological questions. For the atheist, rather, what I would want to stress is that there are always different ways of "knowing," and that living one's life strictly by what one can empirically and mathematically prove is impossible. Putting religion aside, the disciplines of history, art, poetry, and philosophy all provide a way of knowing that is different from science, sometimes even "contradicting" science at face value. But when a poet says something like "the sun melted across the horizon and was consumed by darkness," we know that this is not scientifically accurate: the sun remains unchanged, only our perspective is different. And yet, does that poetic statement not reveal truth about our human experience? Does it not evoke something meaningful in us? 

    I fear that many atheists are too quick to accept a pre-conceptual and uncritical response to religion that limits and undermines the truth that is all around them. There are many ways to know something that don't need to contradict. You do not have to accept religion, but don't limit your way of knowing to the scientific method.

  43. This video is biased and unreasonable. You don’t have to pick and choose between science and religion. And you yourself was being intellectually dishonest by saying “I think”. And with that said, you were arguing from personal incredulity, especially buy saying “I think”. Science and religion are indeed two different things, but that doesn’t mean you have to pick and choose. That’s like saying you have to pick and choose between an apple and an orange, but in actuality you don’t have to. And to add more if a legit scientist is religious, then one thing it wouldn’t do is incorporate it’s religious beliefs into its scientific research. They keep science and religion separate.

  44. Thats just fallacious. Hundreds of religious people have been and are scientists. And religion has pushed science throughout the ages to atleast some degree. One is an entire world view, the other is one form of enquiry.

  45. As a Catholic, I appreciate your respectful treatment of religious perspectives, as well as your thoughtful presentation of your ideas. However, I think that there is a bit more to the issue that I would be curious to hear your thoughts on. For example, we can agree that a Biology textbook would be the most helpful text to consult if we wanted to learn the origins of a certain species. But what if we change the question? What if we wanted to know whether it is right to take someone's life in revenge? A science textbook will not help, but the moral teachings of Jesus would provide quite a bit of insight.

    I sense a respect and courtesy in your video that impels me to comment. If you are able, I would love to hear your thoughts. Either way, have a good day!

  46. There is only one God. God does not have any religion. God doesn't have any shape. Omnipresent, has infinite energy.

  47. hahaha, this is a funny video with his understanding that religion and science is not compatible….hahahahahaha

    You really need to get your head out of the sand.

  48. Tell that to all the religious Scientists that existed in the past(a majority)and all the ones that exist today (still a majority)

  49. Just believe in god you will loss nothing. If heaven is true you are lucky man even if not true you would still be a lucky man.. no one can prove whether god exist or not it has been an argument for a century.. the best thing is to do good and right thing which is good for man kind.. because a father would punish his son for his sin but would never killed his son… I apolozise for my bad english

  50. Not necessarily. One could claim that God designed the universe to be life suitable, and one can also claim that God is just an extremely evolved life form that appears to be a god but is just a being capable of harnessing great energy, like Q on star trek. Science however, IS definitely real and accurate without a doubt.

  51. Hemant Mehta better not dare call himself the “Secular Voice”, because he’s not the secular voice. He’s the “Antireligion Voice”, and hell he might as well retitle himself that. He has not shown one shred of reason in this video, and he has disparaged one of the greatest scientific minds in history, none other than Stephen Jay Gould. I despise Hemant Mehta, and anybody else antireligion.

  52. To me, science is humans attempting to learn the language of God. I can agree that of course, if taken completely literally, the bible and everything else is false. However, I’ve come to find out that a lot of biblical books are allegories. We have to take into account when the bible was written and who it was written for originally. You’re never gonna explain the big bang, evolution, or really quantum anything to anyone living even 100 years ago, let alone 3,000. So, to explain basic principles, you have to use simple stories. Notice how humans were created on the same “day” as animals in Genesis. Notice also how Hebrew is only 6,000 words large and thus can have several different meanings. It’s like their, they’re, and there, or effect and affect, only each hebrew word often has more than 2 or 3 different meanings. Anyways…
    Science does not reject God, and God doesn’t reject science when we look at everything between the lines and beyond the average view. To me, that’s like saying Henry Ford rejected the laws and materials used to create his cars.
    What really gets me going are those who claim to be completely right and bully anyone who rejects it. Two prime examples of this are retards like Ken Ham and Richard Dawkins. Instead of trying to reason with an opposing view, they just shut you down and out with the simple explanation of either “God did it.” Or “nothing did it”, and if you continue fighting with them, they just call you names. Don’t be those people. That’s pseudoscience and pseudointellectualism at their finest.
    Science demands us to question and test everything, as does even God. Israel, by the way, literally means “struggle with God”, and we are repeatedly encouraged to “seek and you will find”. In science, we are encouraged to essentially struggle with theories and seek out answers. So, in a way, science is God and God is science. At least, that’s how I see it. But God, to me, is also personal. He cares for us individually and as a whole. Personal life experiences are evident of that.

  53. The more I know, the more my faith also grows. I say that as a person with 3 bachelors, 2 masters, and 3 doctorates.

  54. if you beleive science and religion are compatible " don't expect people to take you seriously" Your hillarious Mehta. Atheist are roughly 7% of the worlds population. Some 7 Billion people don't take you fools seriously. Islam and Science are perfectly compatible. In fact science is what guides us towards God. Here Mehta, do me a favor. The Quran makes certain claims. If you can show me that someone has disproved one of them I'll leave Islam instantly. 1. The Quran claims that humans are God's successors on earth, the crown of creation and most superior beings. Show me another life form smarter than us, superior to us who rule the Earth. Oh wait…. That's right. You cant. Secondly the Quran says every living thing will die. So cheat death or show me someone who did and I'll leave Islam in a jiffy. Thirdly the Quran talks about Allah "creating" things from non existence to existence. Please create something tangible from nothing. Don't mold, transform, sculpt or construct something from existing substances. Create something from nothing. If you manage to create a spec or particle I will leave Islam. Allah created everything from nothing hence the verse. "Were they created by nothing, or were they themselves the creators?" 52:35 The Holy Quran

  55. you haven't spoken to enough Jews. While personally atheist, I have been able to disprove every anti-religion claim using their arguments, for all religions (not just Judaism).
    I don't believe in religion, but I am surrounded by people who do, acc by some of the experts of those religions, and I can confirm that they are NOT incompatible. Sorry. Try me.

  56. I heard that Albert Einstein said, "science without religion is lame, but religion without science is blind". What do people think about this?

  57. if you are a low minded person anything could never be compatible. if you are a critical thinker everything could overlap each other at some point.

  58. I go to a private Christian Catholic school, and I’m atheist (I haven’t told any staff members or family that yet). One time, in science class, my teacher (Mrs. Kinzel) was saying how her science book credited God with the creation of the universe, I wanted to raise my hand and say “If that’s what your science book said, then that wasn’t a science book. Religion and science cannot agree on certain things, how the universe was created is one of them.”

    I am a hard-core science nerd, and have been for as long as I can remember. I was watching How the Universe Works when I was about 7-years-old, and I understood it (I’m not trying to brag). That’s why Mrs. Kinzel’s comment about the whole God-made-the-universe claim really- I wouldn’t say offended, but, kinda annoyed me.

    I done now.

  59. But science is also kinda of a religion in itself cause not everything can be explained threw science and a lot of science facts are actually theories so eeeh not saying much friend

  60. which is why it was a act of super natural wonder that Christ was born from a virgin and rose from the dead because God is beyond the laws of nature that he himself put into place…idk I dnt hate this guy but it's amusing listening to his logic on God and the super natural

  61. This crackpot aught to read this article, which destroys every argument he makes:

  62. You need to be introduced to my Lord and savior Jesus christ…oh yeah, you will I forgot….remember this, remember this comment and remember the name of who told you this….when you die and resurrect for the day of judgement echo these words in your eardrums "your preconceived notions and solid, steadfast, unshakeable belief doesn't mean shit when you're standing in front of the man that made you and all that inhabits this universe…" In that moment just know…it was all a fallacy. Don't get me wrong science is intriguing, learning more of astronomy, geology, anatomy, biology, psychology, and of the aquatic elements and all it consists of is amazing…mind blowing at that….but someone orchestrated that. Just like scientists orchestrated experiments and equations to further and expand our mental plains and open our eyes to the beauty of the universe….I rest my case.

  63. This is simple, concise, accurate and correct. I would love to see you debate on a suitable topic, I think you would be unbeatable. You would have a chance to sow a seed of doubt in many minds. RSPB

  64. When the religion is Islam, it is compatible with science. Our holy book, Qur an is 80% scientific (not known during it's revelation.) Not even a fact is proven wrong. To know some examples, search in youtube "9 shocking facts about the Qur an by Merciful Servant", You will get it!

  65. Well, here's my question. When science says they haven't discovered God, what exactly are they expecting to discover? Do they think they're going find a guy with a shiny beard sitting on a cloud and eating a bucket of popcorn saying, "Oh hey. What's up?" How do we know we haven't already discovered him but can't recognize him? Food for thought.

  66. Religion is pure black magic through "praying" with "holy ghosts" of dead people, but in the Dark Ages (holy crab, we are stil in it!) the Catholic Church pretend that they are against witchcraft and therefore they used the Inquisition for killing innocent people (the so-called witches) who were just telling the scientific thruth.
    Their practices are very dangerous although many people like their rituals and sermony's. Don't command a ghost to do something for you. Some day it will be turned against you.
    For most people the hell is on earth suffering horribly lives and abused by others (The Vatican, psychiatry, health services, health insurance companies, police, government, sorry guys!). Slavery is still going on……!#[email protected]&&…….for $$$$$.

  67. Totally agree with the title. And cos atheism is a response to religion it is also incompatible with science. Agnostic is the preferred default position in science. Especially soft, theoretical science

  68. 3:34 the dismissal neo-atheists have for Philosophy is simply a dishonesty to atheist itself.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *