As discussed in the previous blog entry, scientific theories of how the world came to be and the creation story can co-exist. In "The Well-Crafted Arguement" there is an essay by Gregg Easterbrook called, "The New Convergence." It talks about how the debate between religion and science was declared closed in the 1980s, but this essay, published in 2002, states that it has been re-opened. As we have seen in recent years, this is a true statement. One of the reasons being that nobody can agree how the world came to be. The big bang theory is one option given by scientists, but it has also been said to be "only understood as a 'miracle'"(The New Convergence). Another statement in this essay is that "discoveries of physics 'seem to reflect intelligence at work in natural law'." Both these and many other statements and observations bring up the point that scientists have started to turn to religious leaders to fill in the blanks.
The really big questions in life, such as why we are here and how the universe began, are still not completely answered. And the more scientists find out, the more mystery there is to all these questions. Which is probably the main reason they are turning to religion to find out. They are reaching towards "spiritual thinkers to help them comprehend what they're learning"(The New Convergence). Religion can be really helpful in this aspect. The big bang somewhat explains how the Earth could have been created, and the theory of evolution explains how we got to where we are now. But religion fills in the missing pieces. We don't have to know exactly why something is the way it is and the science behind it. Sometimes just knowing that there is intelligence behind the design can keep us at ease and know that even though we may not have exact answers, somebody knows what they are doing and we can relax about it.

The theory of evolution and religion can coexist. There are even scientists who admit to this. I found an article about this topic at:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/10/1018_041018_science_religion_2.html

I was surprised to find out that there are many scientists who belive in a religion and don't let it interfere with their work lives. If anything they make it work together. In the above article is states, "In a 1997 survey in the science journal Nature, 40 percent of U.S. scientists said they believe in God—not just a creator, but a God to whom one can pray in expectation of an answer." Scientists are just as likely to believe in a God as other people. Why would this be? One thought is that science is good at answering "how" questions one may have, such as "how did the universe evolve to what we see it as today?" Then on the religion side, it is better at answering "why" questions, such as "why is there a universe at all?" Looking at this idea can give us more insight to how we can incorporate both religion and science.

An astrophysicist named Joel Primack said in the article, "In the last few years astronomy has come together so that we're now able to tell a coherent story of how the universe began. This story does not contradict God, but instead enlarges [the idea of] God." This also shows us how scientists can be religious and believe in a God. Back when science was first becoming popular, scientists were studying the way of the world by believing they were researching how the things God created work. They wanted to prove the existence of a supreme being, not counter-prove as many are doing today. In today's world, the debate between science and religion is a topic in which people are trying to prove one side is better than the other, not that they can work together. That is why one needs to look to the scientists of the past and those today who are religious. They show us how we can use both aspects of life to answer the many questions we may have about our universe.