From Newsgroup: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy

Many Baby Boomers are sceptical about God. They think that believing in
a higher power is probably incompatible with rationality. Over the last
few centuries, religious belief has appeared to be in rapid decline, and materialism (the idea that the physical world is all there is to
reality) has been on the rise, as the natural outcome of modern science
and reason.

But if this scepticism is common among my older generation, times are changing. As we come to the end of the first quarter of the 21st
century, the tables are turning rCo with scientific discoveries making
people question the very things they took for granted and thought
rational. Perhaps surprisingly, Gen Z are leading the way, purporting
that the belief in GodrCOs existence might not be just a trend on the rise
rCo itrCOs a rationally sound conviction, in line with their attitude
towards science and religion.

While the findings of Copernicus, Galileo, and Darwin created the
impression that the workings of the universe could be explained without
a creator God, the last century has seen what I call rCyThe Great Reversal
of SciencerCO. With a number of break-through scientific discoveries rCo including thermodynamics, the theory of relativity, and quantum
mechanics, plus the Big Bang and theories of expansion, heat death, and fine-tuning of the universe rCo the pendulum of science has swung back in
the opposite direction.

More and more convincingly, and perhaps in spite of itself, science
today is pointing to the fact that, to be explained, our universe needs
a creator. In the words of Robert Wilson, Nobel Prize winner for the
discovery of the echo of the Big Bang in 1978, and an agnostic: rCyIf all
this is true [the Big Bang theory] we cannot avoid the question of creation.rCO

It is true that the existence of God cannot be proved incontrovertibly.
While absolute proofs only exist in the theoretical domains of
mathematics and logic, relative proofs are what we normally deal with,
and what is generally considered rCyevidencerCO in everyday life. If, like Richard Dawkins, we take a rational and scientific approach to the
existence or non-existence of God, then we should only be persuaded by multiple, independent, and converging pieces of evidence.

Scientists across many fields of inquiry are now coming round to the
idea that the thermal death of the universe and the Big Bang are strong evidence that our cosmos had an absolute beginning, while the
fine-tuning of the universe and the transition from inert matter to life
imply (separately) some more extraordinary fine tuning, showing the intervention of a creator external to our world.

With sets of converging evidence from different scientific disciplines rCo cosmology to physics, biology to chemistry rCo it is increasingly
difficult for materialists to hold their position. Indeed, if they deny
a creator, then they must accept and uphold that the universe had no beginning, that some of the greatest laws of physics (the principle of conservation of mass-energy, for example) have been violated, and that
the laws of nature have no particular reason to favour the emergence of
life.

Weighing up the evidence on each side of the scale is a matter of
intellectual rigour, and the question rCyIs there a creator God?rCO is one
we should all be asking ourselves, with serious implication for every
one of us. WhatrCOs intriguing is that itrCOs actually the youth, who yourCOd think would be more preoccupied with more mundane and practical
concerns, that are leading the way.

Last August, a YouGov survey revealed that belief in God has doubled
among young people (aged 18-24) in the last four years, with atheism
falling in the same age group from 49 per cent in August 2021 to 32 per
cent. Interpreting the data, Rev Marcus Walker, rector of St Bartholomew
the Great in the City of London, mentioned that young people rCyseem
really interested in the intellectual and spiritual side of religionrCO.

Another report from the think tank Theos revealed that Gen Z have a more balanced perspective towards the relationship between science and
religion. Over one in two young people think religion has a place in the modern world, and the majority (68 per cent) of Gen Z respondents
believe that you could be religious and be a good scientist.

Far from painting a picture in which the number of people believing in
God is dwindling (which has been the usual narrative in the last
century), this research suggests we are at the dawn of a revolution rCo
one in which belief in God is not simply supported by science, but
embraced by younger generations, too.

In general, Gen Z seems to have positive and hopeful view of sciencerCOs impact on the world. According to recent figures, 49 per cent of Gen Z
trust scientists and academics the most to lead global change, far ahead
of politicians (8 per cent) and world leaders (6 per cent) (WaterAid,
2025). And yet, they are still spiritually curious: their trust in
science doesnrCOt preclude them from wanting to explore spirituality and contemplating something bigger than our universe.

Could they be the ones showing older generations a new way forward, one
in which religion and science can coexist? And, more to the point, we
now have the scientific evidence that would support a big shift in perspective. In the words of 91-year-old Carlo Rubbia, Professor of
Physics at Harvard and Nobel laureate: rCyWe come to God by the path of reason, others follow the irrational path.rCO


Michel-Yves Bollor|-
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy

On 2025-10-12 6:00 a.m., Julian wrote:

Many Baby Boomers are sceptical about God. They think that believing
in a higher power is probably incompatible with rationality. Over the
last few centuries, religious belief has appeared to be in rapid
decline, and materialism (the idea that the physical world is all
there is to reality) has been on the rise, as the natural outcome of
modern science and reason.

But if this scepticism is common among my older generation, times are changing. As we come to the end of the first quarter of the 21st
century, the tables are turning rCo with scientific discoveries making people question the very things they took for granted and thought
rational. Perhaps surprisingly, Gen Z are leading the way, purporting
that the belief in GodrCOs existence might not be just a trend on the
rise rCo itrCOs a rationally sound conviction, in line with their attitude towards science and religion.

While the findings of Copernicus, Galileo, and Darwin created the
impression that the workings of the universe could be explained
without a creator God, the last century has seen what I call rCyThe
Great Reversal of SciencerCO. With a number of break-through scientific discoveries rCo including thermodynamics, the theory of relativity, and quantum mechanics, plus the Big Bang and theories of expansion, heat
death, and fine-tuning of the universe rCo the pendulum of science has
swung back in the opposite direction.

More and more convincingly, and perhaps in spite of itself, science
today is pointing to the fact that, to be explained, our universe
needs a creator. In the words of Robert Wilson, Nobel Prize winner for
the discovery of the echo of the Big Bang in 1978, and an agnostic:
rCyIf all this is true [the Big Bang theory] we cannot avoid the
question of creation.rCO

It is true that the existence of God cannot be proved
incontrovertibly. While absolute proofs only exist in the theoretical domains of mathematics and logic, relative proofs are what we normally
deal with, and what is generally considered rCyevidencerCO in everyday
life. If, like Richard Dawkins, we take a rational and scientific
approach to the existence or non-existence of God, then we should only
be persuaded by multiple, independent, and converging pieces of evidence.

Scientists across many fields of inquiry are now coming round to the
idea that the thermal death of the universe and the Big Bang are
strong evidence that our cosmos had an absolute beginning, while the fine-tuning of the universe and the transition from inert matter to
life imply (separately) some more extraordinary fine tuning, showing
the intervention of a creator external to our world.

With sets of converging evidence from different scientific disciplines
rCo cosmology to physics, biology to chemistry rCo it is increasingly difficult for materialists to hold their position. Indeed, if they
deny a creator, then they must accept and uphold that the universe had
no beginning, that some of the greatest laws of physics (the principle
of conservation of mass-energy, for example) have been violated, and
that the laws of nature have no particular reason to favour the
emergence of life.

Weighing up the evidence on each side of the scale is a matter of intellectual rigour, and the question rCyIs there a creator God?rCO is one we should all be asking ourselves, with serious implication for every
one of us. WhatrCOs intriguing is that itrCOs actually the youth, who yourCOd think would be more preoccupied with more mundane and practical concerns, that are leading the way.

Last August, a YouGov survey revealed that belief in God has doubled
among young people (aged 18-24) in the last four years, with atheism
falling in the same age group from 49 per cent in August 2021 to 32
per cent. Interpreting the data, Rev Marcus Walker, rector of St
Bartholomew the Great in the City of London, mentioned that young
people rCyseem really interested in the intellectual and spiritual side
of religionrCO.

Another report from the think tank Theos revealed that Gen Z have a
more balanced perspective towards the relationship between science and religion. Over one in two young people think religion has a place in
the modern world, and the majority (68 per cent) of Gen Z respondents believe that you could be religious and be a good scientist.

Far from painting a picture in which the number of people believing in
God is dwindling (which has been the usual narrative in the last
century), this research suggests we are at the dawn of a revolution rCo
one in which belief in God is not simply supported by science, but
embraced by younger generations, too.

In general, Gen Z seems to have positive and hopeful view of sciencerCOs impact on the world. According to recent figures, 49 per cent of Gen Z
trust scientists and academics the most to lead global change, far
ahead of politicians (8 per cent) and world leaders (6 per cent)
(WaterAid, 2025). And yet, they are still spiritually curious: their
trust in science doesnrCOt preclude them from wanting to explore spirituality and contemplating something bigger than our universe.

Could they be the ones showing older generations a new way forward,
one in which religion and science can coexist? And, more to the point,
we now have the scientific evidence that would support a big shift in perspective. In the words of 91-year-old Carlo Rubbia, Professor of
Physics at Harvard and Nobel laureate: rCyWe come to God by the path of reason, others follow the irrational path.rCO

Michel-Yves Bollor|-

"The dance of atoms, electrons and nuclei, which in all its fury is
subject to God's eternal laws."
- Max Born

Influential in the development of quantum mechanics. He also made contributions to solid-state physics and optics, winner of the 1954
Nobel Prize in physics.


"There is no conflict between science and religion. I was interested in
truth from the point of view of salvation just as much as in truth from
the point of view of scientific certainty. It appeared to me that there
were two paths to truth, and I decided to follow both of them."

-Georges Lemaitre

Lemaitre was the first to identify that the recession of nearby galaxies
can be explained by a theory of an expanding universe. Then he proposed
the Big Bang Theory.


"of course.. we all know that our own reality depends on the structure
of our consciousness; we can objectify no more than a small part of our
world. But even when we try to probe into the subjective realm, we
cannot ignore the central order. In the final analysis, the central
order with which we commune in the language of religion, must win out."

-Werner Heisenberg


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy

On 12/10/2025 15:38, Tara wrote:

On 2025-10-12 6:00 a.m., Julian wrote:

Many Baby Boomers are sceptical about God. They think that believing
in a higher power is probably incompatible with rationality. Over the
last few centuries, religious belief has appeared to be in rapid
decline, and materialism (the idea that the physical world is all
there is to reality) has been on the rise, as the natural outcome of
modern science and reason.

But if this scepticism is common among my older generation, times are
changing. As we come to the end of the first quarter of the 21st
century, the tables are turning rCo with scientific discoveries making
people question the very things they took for granted and thought
rational. Perhaps surprisingly, Gen Z are leading the way, purporting
that the belief in GodrCOs existence might not be just a trend on the
rise rCo itrCOs a rationally sound conviction, in line with their attitude >> towards science and religion.

While the findings of Copernicus, Galileo, and Darwin created the
impression that the workings of the universe could be explained
without a creator God, the last century has seen what I call rCyThe
Great Reversal of SciencerCO. With a number of break-through scientific
discoveries rCo including thermodynamics, the theory of relativity, and
quantum mechanics, plus the Big Bang and theories of expansion, heat
death, and fine-tuning of the universe rCo the pendulum of science has
swung back in the opposite direction.

More and more convincingly, and perhaps in spite of itself, science
today is pointing to the fact that, to be explained, our universe
needs a creator. In the words of Robert Wilson, Nobel Prize winner for
the discovery of the echo of the Big Bang in 1978, and an agnostic:
rCyIf all this is true [the Big Bang theory] we cannot avoid the
question of creation.rCO

It is true that the existence of God cannot be proved
incontrovertibly. While absolute proofs only exist in the theoretical
domains of mathematics and logic, relative proofs are what we normally
deal with, and what is generally considered rCyevidencerCO in everyday
life. If, like Richard Dawkins, we take a rational and scientific
approach to the existence or non-existence of God, then we should only
be persuaded by multiple, independent, and converging pieces of evidence.

Scientists across many fields of inquiry are now coming round to the
idea that the thermal death of the universe and the Big Bang are
strong evidence that our cosmos had an absolute beginning, while the
fine-tuning of the universe and the transition from inert matter to
life imply (separately) some more extraordinary fine tuning, showing
the intervention of a creator external to our world.

With sets of converging evidence from different scientific disciplines
rCo cosmology to physics, biology to chemistry rCo it is increasingly
difficult for materialists to hold their position. Indeed, if they
deny a creator, then they must accept and uphold that the universe had
no beginning, that some of the greatest laws of physics (the principle
of conservation of mass-energy, for example) have been violated, and
that the laws of nature have no particular reason to favour the
emergence of life.

Weighing up the evidence on each side of the scale is a matter of
intellectual rigour, and the question rCyIs there a creator God?rCO is one >> we should all be asking ourselves, with serious implication for every
one of us. WhatrCOs intriguing is that itrCOs actually the youth, who
yourCOd think would be more preoccupied with more mundane and practical
concerns, that are leading the way.

Last August, a YouGov survey revealed that belief in God has doubled
among young people (aged 18-24) in the last four years, with atheism
falling in the same age group from 49 per cent in August 2021 to 32
per cent. Interpreting the data, Rev Marcus Walker, rector of St
Bartholomew the Great in the City of London, mentioned that young
people rCyseem really interested in the intellectual and spiritual side
of religionrCO.

Another report from the think tank Theos revealed that Gen Z have a
more balanced perspective towards the relationship between science and
religion. Over one in two young people think religion has a place in
the modern world, and the majority (68 per cent) of Gen Z respondents
believe that you could be religious and be a good scientist.

Far from painting a picture in which the number of people believing in
God is dwindling (which has been the usual narrative in the last
century), this research suggests we are at the dawn of a revolution rCo
one in which belief in God is not simply supported by science, but
embraced by younger generations, too.

In general, Gen Z seems to have positive and hopeful view of sciencerCOs
impact on the world. According to recent figures, 49 per cent of Gen Z
trust scientists and academics the most to lead global change, far
ahead of politicians (8 per cent) and world leaders (6 per cent)
(WaterAid, 2025). And yet, they are still spiritually curious: their
trust in science doesnrCOt preclude them from wanting to explore
spirituality and contemplating something bigger than our universe.

Could they be the ones showing older generations a new way forward,
one in which religion and science can coexist? And, more to the point,
we now have the scientific evidence that would support a big shift in
perspective. In the words of 91-year-old Carlo Rubbia, Professor of
Physics at Harvard and Nobel laureate: rCyWe come to God by the path of
reason, others follow the irrational path.rCO


Michel-Yves Bollor|-

"The dance of atoms, electrons and nuclei, which in all its fury is
subject to God's eternal laws."
- Max Born

Influential in the development of quantum mechanics. He also made contributions to solid-state physics and optics, winner of the 1954
Nobel Prize in physics.

"There is no conflict between science and religion. I was interested in truth from the point of view of salvation just as much as in truth from
the point of view of scientific certainty. It appeared to me that there
were two paths to truth, and I decided to follow both of them."

-Georges Lemaitre

Lemaitre was the first to identify that the recession of nearby galaxies
can be explained by a theory of an expanding universe. Then he proposed
the Big Bang Theory.

"of course.. we all know that our own reality depends on the structure
of our consciousness; we can objectify no more than a small part of our world. But even when we try to probe into the subjective realm, we
cannot ignore the central order. In the final analysis, the central
order with which we commune in the language of religion, must win out."

-Werner Heisenberg

God is pulling the strings theory.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy

On 2025-10-12 10:48 a.m., Julian wrote:

"of course.. we all know that our own reality depends on the
structure of our consciousness; we can objectify no more than a small
part of our world. But even when we try to probe into the subjective
realm, we cannot ignore the central order. In the final analysis, the
central order with which we commune in the language of religion, must
win out."

-Werner Heisenberg

God is pulling the strings theory.

-a :-)


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy

On Sun, 12 Oct 2025 11:00:25 +0100, Julian <julianlzb87@gmail.com>
wrote:

Many Baby Boomers are sceptical about God. They think that believing in
a higher power is probably incompatible with rationality. Over the last
few centuries, religious belief has appeared to be in rapid decline, and >materialism (the idea that the physical world is all there is to
reality) has been on the rise, as the natural outcome of modern science
and reason.

But if this scepticism is common among my older generation, times are >changing. As we come to the end of the first quarter of the 21st
century, the tables are turning u with scientific discoveries making
people question the very things they took for granted and thought
rational. Perhaps surprisingly, Gen Z are leading the way, purporting
that the belief in GodAs existence might not be just a trend on the rise
u itAs a rationally sound conviction, in line with their attitude
towards science and religion.

While the findings of Copernicus, Galileo, and Darwin created the
impression that the workings of the universe could be explained without
a creator God, the last century has seen what I call aThe Great Reversal
of ScienceA. With a number of break-through scientific discoveries u >including thermodynamics, the theory of relativity, and quantum
mechanics, plus the Big Bang and theories of expansion, heat death, and >fine-tuning of the universe u the pendulum of science has swung back in
the opposite direction.

More and more convincingly, and perhaps in spite of itself, science
today is pointing to the fact that, to be explained, our universe needs
a creator. In the words of Robert Wilson, Nobel Prize winner for the >discovery of the echo of the Big Bang in 1978, and an agnostic: aIf all
this is true [the Big Bang theory] we cannot avoid the question of >creation.A

It is true that the existence of God cannot be proved incontrovertibly. >While absolute proofs only exist in the theoretical domains of
mathematics and logic, relative proofs are what we normally deal with,
and what is generally considered aevidenceA in everyday life. If, like >Richard Dawkins, we take a rational and scientific approach to the
existence or non-existence of God, then we should only be persuaded by >multiple, independent, and converging pieces of evidence.

Scientists across many fields of inquiry are now coming round to the
idea that the thermal death of the universe and the Big Bang are strong >evidence that our cosmos had an absolute beginning, while the
fine-tuning of the universe and the transition from inert matter to life >imply (separately) some more extraordinary fine tuning, showing the >intervention of a creator external to our world.

With sets of converging evidence from different scientific disciplines u >cosmology to physics, biology to chemistry u it is increasingly
difficult for materialists to hold their position. Indeed, if they deny
a creator, then they must accept and uphold that the universe had no >beginning, that some of the greatest laws of physics (the principle of >conservation of mass-energy, for example) have been violated, and that
the laws of nature have no particular reason to favour the emergence of >life.

In an infinite universe, the precise conditions necessary for the
emergence of reverse entropy based life must have occurred an infinite
numbers of times. As we stare into the universe, what do we mostly
see? Furnaces and rocks, gasses and liquids.

Weighing up the evidence on each side of the scale is a matter of >intellectual rigour, and the question aIs there a creator God?A is one
we should all be asking ourselves, with serious implication for every
one of us.

The first question of serious implication would be, am I capable of intellectual rigour? The next question would be, since I am bound to
the care and maintenance of a mortal meat machine, what would I do
differently based on my answer to the question? If it is in your
power to follow the best path you can perceive, it might be your best
choice would be to simply follow that path. The best choice for you personally.

WhatAs intriguing is that itAs actually the youth, who youAd
think would be more preoccupied with more mundane and practical
concerns, that are leading the way.

I have heard the catholic claim that they indeed do have a document
that is considered the final proof of the existence of god. It is,
however, written in such complex latin that only the most advanced
latin scholars can decipher it. Figgers.

Last August, a YouGov survey revealed that belief in God has doubled
among young people (aged 18-24) in the last four years, with atheism
falling in the same age group from 49 per cent in August 2021 to 32 per >cent. Interpreting the data, Rev Marcus Walker, rector of St Bartholomew
the Great in the City of London, mentioned that young people aseem
really interested in the intellectual and spiritual side of religionA.

Another report from the think tank Theos revealed that Gen Z have a more >balanced perspective towards the relationship between science and
religion. Over one in two young people think religion has a place in the >modern world, and the majority (68 per cent) of Gen Z respondents
believe that you could be religious and be a good scientist.

Far from painting a picture in which the number of people believing in
God is dwindling (which has been the usual narrative in the last
century), this research suggests we are at the dawn of a revolution u
one in which belief in God is not simply supported by science, but
embraced by younger generations, too.

In general, Gen Z seems to have positive and hopeful view of scienceAs >impact on the world. According to recent figures, 49 per cent of Gen Z
trust scientists and academics the most to lead global change, far ahead
of politicians (8 per cent) and world leaders (6 per cent) (WaterAid,
2025). And yet, they are still spiritually curious: their trust in
science doesnAt preclude them from wanting to explore spirituality and >contemplating something bigger than our universe.

Could they be the ones showing older generations a new way forward, one
in which religion and science can coexist? And, more to the point, we
now have the scientific evidence that would support a big shift in >perspective. In the words of 91-year-old Carlo Rubbia, Professor of
Physics at Harvard and Nobel laureate: aWe come to God by the path of >reason, others follow the irrational path.A

Michel-Yves Bolloro

--
Noah Sombrero mustachioed villain
Don't get political with me young man
or I'll tie you to a railroad track and
<<<talk>>> to <<<YOOooooo>>>
Who dares to talk to El Sombrero?
dares: Ned
does not dare: Julian shrinks in horror and warns others away

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy

And conversely true religion believes science is a gift from God

Gregory Nazianzen, the Great, tells us all creativity is divine (28:6; 1
cor 3:5-9) and denounced anti-science at Basil's funeral (42:11) as ignorant, lazy and stupid. This may be found on p151 of the 1977 OEDB Patrsitics textbook used in high schools in Greece (Evagelos Theodorou, Anthology of
Holy Fathers.) More completely from Florovsky v7 p109 "We derive something useful for our orthodoxy even from the worldly science.. Everyone who has a mind will recognize that learning is our highest good.. also worldly
learning, which many Christians incorrectly abhor.. those who hold such an opinion are stupid and ignorant. They want everyone to be just like
themselves, so that the general failing will hide their own"
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2