I have argued here and in many atheist and naturalist blogs and forums that while I love science and the fruits of scientific endeavor, we can't turn it into our God. The main reason is that no matter how much we may think we know about the way things work, we will never know the "rest of the story." A very small amount of new information can make major changes. A HT to Norma for this fantastic original reporting:
I invite you to read the first 5-10 pages of any issue of Nature. Here's what I noticed today:
- The fat metabolism of Drosophila (fruit fly) is a mystery. . .
- They still haven't figured out the influence of genes vs. environment in disease, and some studies are "controversial."
- Astronomers' galaxy theories are in need of a new model because of new observational techniques.
- "despite intense investigation. . ."
- "it is a mystery. . ."
- "new techniques reveal. . ."
- "will test the hypotheses that . . ."
- "previously unknown changes. . . "
- "reveal an unexpected connection in. . ."
- "more widespread consequences than previously predicted. . . "
- "may play a role in climate change (this was not human related). . ."
- "long running debate in how . . . "
- "the nature of how this works is unclear. . ."
- "the reason for this variation has been something of a mystery. . . "
- "there is only one fossil of this 150 million year old species available for analysis. . . "
- "Even some of the most accomplished scientists are in the dark about the most basic information underpinning their work. . . "
- "The plant with the largest flower (a metre across) has no roots, leaves or stems and has no DNA clues on how it is related to other plants. . . "
- the question of whether this property plays an active role in tumors has remained under debate. . . "