our Christianity and science perpetually
at war with each other unfortunately
many people think that they are it's a
myth but let's explore a few specific
stories that are more small-scale myths
that contribute to this larger myth and
as we look at these specific stories ask
yourself which parts of these stories
are credible and which parts are
unbelievable have you heard that people
in the Middle Ages thought the earth was
flat actually they didn't believe that
you probably were taught that religion
induced ignorance made Europeans think
that earth was flat until 1492 when
Columbus came around and showed it was
round by actually sailing long distance
well what were some of the arguments for
a spherical earth that were known before
1492
they included arguments like this one
here is our planet that little black dot
is the North Pole and here's the equator
now medieval students understood that if
you were to stand on top of the North
Pole and look directly overhead you
would see the North Star but if you were
to change your location to the equator
of the earth you would have to look
along the horizon to see that same star
directly over the pole of the earth well
it stands to reason that as you move
from the equator to the pole you would
initially at the equator look right on
your horizon to see the North Star and
then as you move closer and closer to
the pole eventually that star would be
directly overhead
well medieval students understood this
and they realized that this implied that
the earth is round not flat like a pizza
that wouldn't allow for this gradual
curvature in this sort of way
medieval students were quite adept at
arguing for things like this based on
observations and in reasoning from those
observations
here's another argument for a spherical
earth that was well known through
antiquity and through the Middle Ages
during a lunar eclipse the edge
of the shadow of the earth cast on the
moon is curved over about a quarter
century of teaching science including
astronomy I have sort of tests tested
this out with my students and as I
compare my students ability to argue for
a spherical earth with what the average
medieval student knew it turns out that
if there were a debate between these now
dead students and my living students the
dead students would when that is people
in the Middle Ages who were university
educated typically had more rational
arguments based on observations for a
spherical earth than people on the
planet today
so those Middle Ages weren't so dark
after all were they and I mean the myth
is useful for making Christianity look
stupid but it just doesn't sync with
history let's take another myth
Copernicus
removed humans from a privileged centre
and this was a huge blow to
religious-based
human significance Christopher Hitchens
he called this opposition to Copernicus
Christianity's greatest failure the
greatest failure of a world religion and
many people think that the Church
opposed Copernicus because they didn't
want humanity to be demoted from this
privileged cosmic sinner one textbook
communicates this myth in this way
humankind has been torn from its throne
at the center of the cosmos but when you
look at the historical background it
turns out that the center was not
actually the place of honor and
privilege the center was where
generation and corruption occur up high
in the heavens
that's the incorruptible world according
to ancient scientists and that view
although it was criticized during the
Middle Ages it still was very a popular
idea up until the time of Copernicus so
by removing earth from the center and
now considering it as a planet that was
considered or least communicated as a
promotion for Earth by this first
generation of Copernicus I'll give you
an example
Galileo he
wrote I will prove that the earth does
have motion and that it is not the sump
where the universe is filth and ephemera
collect in the center is the place of
generation in corruption it's kind of
like the trash bin of the universe and
Galileo saying I'm gonna show you that
the earth does move and it's not down
there in the dishonorable place but it's
in a more honourable place
Kepler took this promotion even further
he wrote we could not remain at rest in
the center because of that contemplation
science for which man was created which
includes measuring distances to planets
like Venus so once you consider earth a
planet moves and Venus a planet that has
a smaller orbit if you draw a triangle
out using some key observation points
using trigonometry you can figure out
how far Venus is from the Sun compared
to how far earth is in fact astronomers
now call the sun-earth distance one
astronomical unit and you can find out
what Venus distance is in terms of this
astronomical unit Kepler argued that a
moving earth viewpoint was more likely
to be true because it's more likely that
God created a universe and our place in
the universe to make it easier to
discover things do to make it easier to
do science Kepler had a theology that
said God made the world to make it
intelligible and discoverable and so a
moving earth would allow scientists
living on it to discover more than a
stationary earth therefore it's more
likely that the earth moves science and
theology were in harmony theology
actually motivated an argument for the
Copernican view I think this is
fascinating a theological motivation for
a pro Copernican argument
what about Copernicus himself well he
said the cosmos was created for our sake
that doesn't sound like a demotion
so this demotion idea that Copernicus
demoted Earth from a privileged place it
actually got embellished over the year
and extended to try to make it fit with
additional observations such as the fact
that we are not located in the center of
the Milky Way galaxy
so one textbook puts it this way
humankind has been relegated to an
unremarkable position on the periphery
of the Milky Way galaxy in other words
making it sound like another Copernican
demotion on another level that's a
galactic level the same textbooks that
keep repeating this Copernican demotion
myth and extend it to the Galactic level
also teach about the Galactic habitable
zone which is the unique location within
the galaxy that is life friendly you
can't be too close to the center of the
galaxy or too far out in the periphery
or you will not have even the
possibility of life and what's curious
is that sometimes the same textbook will
say oh it's a demotion we don't live in
the center of the galaxy but oh yeah the
Galactic habitable zone so we are in a
special zone that's life friendly what I
find really curious about this is how a
historic myth about the relation between
science and Christianity can actually
distort contemporary astronomy this is a
prime example of that the take home
lesson is scientists can do bizarre
things when they lose control of a
familiar narrative Neil deGrasse Tyson a
well known science popularizer writes
what he calls the cosmic perspective he
says that this perspective includes the
idea that the universe is not a
benevolent cradle designed to nurture
life but a lonely hazardous place and
the cosmic perspective opposes the
childish view that the universe
figuratively and literally revolves
around us Tyson goes on to extend this
Copernican demotion but he adds an
additional twist to the story he says
the cosmic perspective is spiritual even
redemptive but not religious how so well
he seems to think that it redeemed us
from the delusion of design by showing
that were just evolved Stardust and yet
we're special there's something
spiritually significant about being
human because we can
do science well even many non-religious
people find this basis for specialness a
little bit lacking and so many people
are wanting to fill this with something
well a little more jazzed up and there
is a scientific looking story that helps
them to do this and this leads right
into the final myth in my book
unbelievable which I call the
extra-terrestrial enlightenment myth
let's go to a book published by NASA
your tax dollars at work yet explains
one essay by one particular author there
have been these Kopernik and emotions we
all know about that but quote perhaps
it's time for a promotion well what kind
of promotion does he have in mind
he calls it Cosmo cultural evolution and
he claims that this undirected process
can produce what he says is cosmically
significant intelligence moreover he
says it might even have unlimited
significance now this is a myth in the
anthropological sense that is a story
that is imaginative archetypal and it is
worldview shaping this is the most
remarkable tradin offer in the history
of popular science writing here's the
deal we can give up this Copernican
demotion and in exchange we get a
massive promotion ET enlightenment when
we receive the wisdom of the accumulated
years billions of years of Cosmo
cultural evolution and so it's kind of
like we can sit at the feet or lower
appendages of ET and just soak up these
billions of years of wisdom that is a
very inspiring story for many people
skeptic Michael Shermer along the lines
of this story writes any sufficiently
advanced extraterrestrial intelligence
is indistinguishable from God Richard
Dawkins says almost exactly the same
thing the idea is that if ET were to
show up on earth because of the vast
distances of space it would have had to
have created such advanced technology
that that technology would be
indistinguishable from magic so what do
we have
you're a godless materialist story that
anticipates the arrival of a god like ET
how ironic so in conclusion what can we
learn about just the three myths that
we've talked about about the Christians
in the Middle Ages thought the earth was
flat and the Copernican demotion and
this et enlightenment myth there's two
main things we can learn from these
myths first there is a false idea
circulating out there that science grows
only when guided by godless thinking and
yet secondly ironically this misguided
godless thinking atheism has led to the
expectation of a God like ET that will
contact us and radically revised
spirituality and religion on earth my
book unbelievable
not only debunk Smith's like these but
it also shows that Christianity has had
a positive role in the rise of modern
science and that's worth remembering