Thanks Bob. My favorite is Neil deGrasse Tyson’s claims about the afterlife. In my fist book, I wrote this about Neil:
In my investigation of religious history, I found that the most poignant question to be: “what is at stake?” The multitude of answers to this inquiry is what I will share in the following chapters.
But religions are not the only ones guilty of overzealous behavior. Science, for many, has turned into a religion of its own with the same such characteristics. We have highly vocal scientists today who are stretching the boundaries of what they know and projecting theories/beliefs to the public as if they were scientific fact. Here is an example from Neil deGrasse Tyson on Larry King Now.
“There is no evidence that I am conscious of anything [after death] and by the way is that so weird? Did you have consciousness before you were born? Were you saying, how come I’m not on earth, my god, I need to be on earth, where am I? No, there is just the state of non-existence.”
This statement comes across to viewers as being scientific fact, since it is being spoken from a scientist who often uses the phrase “this is science!” to make his point. But someone who proclaims to be a scientist, should not be making statements that violate logic and the recommendation of Socrates, its founder. One should use the triple filter test before speaking: 1) have you made absolutely sure that what you are saying is true, 2) is what you are saying good or 3) is what you are saying useful? In my estimation, Neil deGrasse Tyson’s statement fails all three tests.
Is what Mr. Tyson is saying true? He does not present any evidence for his statement, but there is a scientist, who used accepted forensic methods to investigate claims of reincarnation who would directly dispute his claim. Ian Stevenson dedicated his life to the scientific study of children’s past lives. From a scientific perspective, his body of research and his methods of investigation are solid enough to meet Socrates’ first test of truth. Upon reviewing Stevenson’s work, fellow scientist Robert Almeder said:
“I have heard some people say: Reincarnation couldn’t occur, because we do not know how it could occur. We don’t know how, as scientist we don’t know what the mechanism is. It couldn’t have a mechanism that we could examine, so we can’t know that it occurs. As objections go, that leaves a lot to be desired because you may not know how something occurred, but you have plenty of evidence that it occurs.”
When I write about “science” in this book I am referring to a modern scientific stance that is not in harmony with the founders of science. It is a selective belief in the scientific method, an attitude that distrusts religion and is void of spirituality. This is the science that is taught in universities and is the basis for modern medicine and physics.