Resolved; Christianity was a positive influence in the development of modern science

Cyclic vs. Linear Thinking The Pro in his round 4 rebuttal claimed that the Big Bang Theory did not conflict with the Christian doctrine. In saying this, I assume he is referring to his linear, rational form of thinking that Christianity employs. Yes, the Big Bang Theory can be compatible with Christian doctrine, but that is not the topic of discussion. The discussion regards whether these theories are compatible with linear Christian thinking. Pro claims that evolution, planet formation and the Big Bang Theory all fit with a linear thinking, and the reason because of this? It all comes back to the cause, the cause of God. This is indeed linear thinking, and you can in fact trace each of these theories back in a linear fashion that ends at a point, which you say is God. However, this can ONLY apply to the Big Bang Theory. You can claim that God caused the formation of planets and created Earth, and that this can be traced back through linear thinking to a beginning. However, this beginning would have to had caused the big bang, therefore it is irrelevant at the level of planet formation, which can be naturally a cyclic thought process. The same argument applies to evolution. You can say God caused the big bang which eventually caused evolution, and that this was discovered through linear thinking. But all that was discovered is the start of the big bang, evolution is still a process which requires cyclic thinking. To use linear thinking as an argument, the Pro, who admits this point, must make the assumption that his theory of the big bang where God caused it must be correct. However, he admitted himself that this is just a theory, and we don’t know which theory is correct, and stated that it is not necessarily cyclic thinking. Though if his one theory that shows linear thinking is not proved, how can he say that linear thinking has influenced the development of science. All the evidence we have demonstrates scientific processes which required cyclic thinking: evolution, planet formation, weather systems, quantum mechanics and so on. Hence, by assuming a form of linear thinking from the Christian viewpoint, this causes a negative relationship with the development of science. Summary of Opponents Arguments Before I conclude this debate, I would like to outline my opponents arguments: 1. Scientist A and scientist B are both Christians, and so are many more, so Christianity had a positive relationship with the development of science. 2. The universe is rational, so we can learn something about it. This was due to Christian linear thinking, therefore since Christian allows us to learn something about the universe, it has a positive relationship with the development of science. These arguments are weak and do not display a general case for Christianity being in a positive relationship with the development of science. Along with this, many of these arguments were criticised and debunked. I brought forward evidence which stated some of the scientists my opponent mentioned weren’t actually influenced by their Christian beliefs. The Pro presented little evidence to show that these scientists indeed had Christian beliefs which directly influenced their science, he merely quoted websites which did not provide valid evidence. Hence, the voters should consider the strength of the Pro’s arguments before making their decision. Conclusion To conclude, I would like to discuss some statistics from a series of polls and surveys taken in America. In 2009, it was found that the belief of a God in the science community was half as likely when compared to the general public of America. In 2009, 87% of scientists surveyed accepted Darwin’s theory of evolution, whilst only 32% of the general public accepted this theory. 20% of the general public believe that evolution was directed by some supreme being and 31% believe that humans and other forms of life have simply existed since the beginning of time. [1] There is quite a strong relationship between these opinions and the belief in a God. Considering a majority of American’s believe in the Christian god, couldn’t this be considered as a negative relationship between Christianity and the development of science? Furthermore, it was found that 64% of people would believe their religious beliefs rather than a contradictory scientific discovery. [1] If this is not proof of a negative relationship, I don’t know what is. This clearly shows that the fact people believe in religion blocks the development of science in society. We can see this in our modern day with stem cell research and theories of creation. In conclusion, in the knowledge of my previous argument and all other previous arguments, I have shown that not only does Christianity not have a positive relationship, but it appears to have quite a strong negative relationship with the development of science. I have presented evidence and statistics which support my arguments, and have cross examined and found contradictions in much of the Pro’s sources. If you believe that my arguments are stronger, vote for Con. If you believe that my opponents arguments are stronger, vote for Pro. I will end this debate with a famous quote from Albert Einstein that I believe sums up how Christian beliefs prevented the development of science. Albert Einstein did not believe in quantum mechanics, and this is what he said: "God doesn't play dice with the world" [2] References (1) http://pewresearch.org... (2) Einstein and the Poet: In Search of the Cosmic Man, William Hermanns; Albert Einstein