Deakin Communicating Science 2016

EES 200/101

Religion vs Science – What’s the problem?

For centuries, the debate of whether religion can be hospitable in science has raged. One of the first examples was Galileo Galilei in the 15th century who had conflict with the Roman Catholic Church about the movements of the solar system, based around whether the sun was the centre of our solar system. Plenty of similar disputes have caused there to be a constant winning solution, either science or religion but not both; however can the two both be in unison?

The scientific view

Science over the generations has been down to one simple principle, that facts and evidence should determine the age all question of the real age of the universe and/or the earth and multiple hypothesis take a very factual viewpoint into determining the validity behind this statement. Bill Nye (the Science Guy) recently undertook a debate with Ken Ham creationist who believes the world was created in 6 days and basis his life off the literal truth of the book of Genesis. This debate has the same conclusion and most evangelical debates of this nature, that even if there are facts and evidence that directly disprove or even make you think how in the world can these be true, the religious debate still echoes on till this day. One of the main points from Bill Nye is that how can the world be 6000 years old when we can study the fossil layers in the Grand Canyon and determine their relative ages through Radioactive Dating? Bill Nye is not against religion for its spiritual aspect nor the morals that people get from certain religions, he is against the problem that multiple states in America don’t teach evolution in science and would rather teach the book of Genesis to our kids. This not only will bring up children being science illiterate but will not propel any technology forward if appropriate science is not taught.


Science in aspects that interfere or reject some parts of religion need to remain separate, but it is when the 2 inhibit one another that it is the real issue. It is when rational intellectuals do not see the correlation and the harm that so many people can see in Religion that is at the centre of this blog. I’m not saying that religion has no basis in life, it is fundamental to our society’s culture. However, it is shocking to see that nearly 64% of religious folk do not believe in evolution in America, 64%. These are shocking figures and as we delve ever so deeper into our universes questions, the truth about our existence will unfold. But for now, our children and our children’s children need to be brought up in a scientific literate society where innovation is at the forefront of their minds, as we will fall so far behind in technological development we may even head back to the ‘stone age’, excuse the evolutionary pun.


As this debate continues to serve a delicious slice of controversy to us, I can’t wait to see where this outdated, idiotic and childish topic will take us in the future!

In the words of the great Richard Dawkins, “natural-selection will not remove ignorance from future generations” so it is our job to stick to the facts and live in harmony with religion until the day comes where we find the answers to the origins of our universe.


N/A. 2016. Science and Religion: Exploring the Spectrum. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 5 May 2016].

Natural History. 2009. How do we know the ages of fossils and fossil-bearing rocks?. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 6 May 2016].

PewResearchCentre /David Masci. 2014. 5 fatcs about evolution and religion. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 7 May 2016].

Time/ Elizabeth Diaz. 2014. What You Missed While Not Watching the Bill Nye and Ken Ham Creation Debate. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 8 May 2016].



2 comments on “Religion vs Science – What’s the problem?

  1. miggyn
    May 8, 2016

    I’m all for science, however religion could help benefit technology. Because in modern days there are always scientists that are trying to undermine religious views. Think of it as a motivator, and the same thing applies to the other side, religions may try to disprove theories using science. This competition could be what had driven somebody to even start researching the origins of the earth, because they might have looked at a piece of a religious scripture and tried to come up with possible theories that differs from a supernatural perspective that religions carry. So it might be healthy competition that will probably not end for a while.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. wdrogemu
    June 1, 2016

    My problem with the above comment is although that may be the case it isn’t necessary. See necessary and sufficient conditions.
    Competition between science and religion may be sufficient to drive science forward, but it is not necessary as science as an undertaking is in and of itself is a desire to learn more, know more, question more.
    I would argue that religion in fact is more of a hindrance than a motivator.
    It is through childhood indoctrination that most people become religious, this also coincides with when an individual is most ready to take in new information. If someone is taught from a young age that the Earth is 6000 years old, the news of a 4.5 billion year old Earth would be quite confronting to them.
    Same goes for creation of humans vs evolution.

    It is a barrier to knowledge that is not needed.



Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


This entry was posted on May 8, 2016 by in Uncategorized.

Deakin Authors

%d bloggers like this: